Feed aggregator

Free Online EMF Summit Begins September 2nd

Activist Post -

Electromagnetic Killing Fields / image sourceActivist Post

Join thousands for a free online EMF Summit starting tomorrow and continuing every Tuesday until December. Each week is a new video interview, which begins Sept. 2nd with Dirty Electricity: How We Can Co-exist With This Powerful Technology and Its Inherent Dangers by Dr. Samuel Milham the physician-epidemiologist who first alerted the world about electromagnetic exposure in various careers and the link to human disease.

Josh del Sol, producer and director of Take Back Your Power, will be on the interview panel along with world-class researchers, scientists, microwave weapons experts and authors such as:

  • Dr. Olle Johansson, neuroscientist (as in Take Back Your Power) - See Activist Post's article here for more information about Dr. Johansson's courageous work.
  • Barrie Trower, former consultant to MI5 and MI6 
  • Dr. Martin Blank, researcher of DNA damage caused by EMF 
  • Dr. Ross Anderson, EMF consultant & retired physician 
  • Dave Stetzer, dirty electricity expert and retired military electrician 
  • Dr. Ann Louise Gittleman, acclaimed nutritionist and author 
  • Farren Lander, electropollution consultant

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Learn more about electromagnetic radiation, health and solutions. Everything you need to protect yourself from the dangers of Electromagnetic Field Radiation and dirty electricity. Discover the healing effects of Pulsed Electromagnetic Field (PEMF) Therapy.

Register HERE Now

NSA: There’s a Spy in my Soup!

Activist Post -

Janet Phelan
Activist Post

Okay, we now know that our phone calls are being monitored. Snowden has made it clear that none of our electronically conveyed communications are secure from NSA snooping. But to find that they are now listening to our potato chips?

As revealed recently in an article in MIT News, technology has been developed which would allow our relentlessly nosy government to pick up voice prints from a bag of potato chips, a glass of water, a window or potted plant.

This is how it works:

The tiny vibration of objects as a result of a nearby conversation can now be picked up by a camera and the conversation reconstructed, due to an algorithm developed by researchers at MIT, Microsoft and Adobe. In a statement by the first author of the MIT paper, Abe Davis wrote: “When sound hits an object, it causes the object to vibrate. The motion of this vibration creates a very subtle visual signal that’s usually invisible to the naked eye. People didn’t realize that this information was there.”

Armed with the perception that the US government has developed other intrusive technologies, I conducted a search for prevailing spyware. We already know that our buttons can be replaced with microphones, that our passports are chipped and can GPS us at any given latitude, that our smart phones can, in concert with Google maps, betray our movements down to a precise address. We know that there is technology under development which may one day lay bare even our most secret thoughts.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); But spying on potato chips?

A search for NSA patents reveals a wide spread of mechanisms to track, locate, amplify and analyze our most microscopic of behaviors. We should therefore not be surprised to learn that back in 1982, the NSA sought to patent a method for secure voice conferencing. That’s right—the NSA has secured their conference calls from outside intruders and hacks, while ours, we find, are wide open.

At a time when many are concerned that their offices or homes might be bugged, we might note that the NSA developed a proprietary method to locate a transmitter.

Hey, bro! Wanna share? No?….well, I thought maybe not…

And while we mere mortals must content ourselves with shredding our documents in hope of maintaining security, we should know that the NSA has gone a step further and patented a shredder residue dispersion system.

A reusable tamper evident envelope would be useful for those who resort to snail mail as a non-electronically surveilled means of communication, which is returning to favor by those wishing to escape the 20/20 vision of Big Brother. Unfortunately, this has been patented by the NSA and is—once again—not on the market for the plebes.

A self-authenticating cryptographic apparatus might come in handy for those trying to communicate in a personal, private manner. You remember—that archaic old Fourth Amendment which promised us security in our papers? If it is any consolation, Big Brother Loves You, and his peculiarly insistent nosiness is entirely benign. Right, Winston Smith?

This is just the outer layer of the NSA patents, however. The patents reveal a level of voodoo science which is admittedly beyond the ken of this reporter. Methods for turning walls into mirrors, a space integrating ambiguity processor, measure of ramen gain spectrum in optical fiber, a method of measuring gain of photonic inverters, a biomimetic voice identifier and an infinite impulse response resonator digital filter left me scratching my head, baffled.

But I found one patent that completely lifted my spirits. Should one be worried that the NSA is only trying to peer into your private life, it should come as a relief to know that the NSA also patented an integrated child seat for a vehicle. At a time when paranoia about NSA spying has become a common malaise, it is good to know that they are actually doing some useful and helpful research.

I didn’t check to see if there was a microphone implanted in the seat, however….

Janet C. Phelan, investigative journalist and human rights defender that has traveled pretty extensively over the Asian region, an author of a tell-all book EXILE, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook” where this first appeared.

NATO’s Options in Ukraine

Activist Post -

Tony Cartalucci
Activist Post

After provoking what is increasingly a devastating and expanding conflict in Ukraine, NATO appears to be out of options as its proxy regime loses its grip on both its military campaign against its own population in eastern Ukraine, as well as political control in the capital of Kiev itself. However, despite the turn of events, with NATO apparently rudderless, those seeking to undo and reserve the damage the West has created in Eastern Europe must not become complacent.

NATO still possesses several options with which it can respond to its deteriorating proxy regime and the eroding of its interests both in the region, and around the world.

Propaganda Retrenchment Before Aggressive Military Aid

As the West has done in Syria, it now seeks to do in Ukraine – a complete retrenchment of the official narrative regarding the nature of the ongoing conflict. Previously, the Western media has gone through great lengths to obscure overt Nazism running throughout both the political front it is propping up in Kiev, as well as across the irregular forces sent alongside what remains of Ukraine’s national army. Western media outlets have briefly touched on the issue in attempts to mitigate and manage growing public concern.

Regarding the formation by the Interior Ministry in Kiev of a battalion of Nazis – the Azov Battalion – the BBC would publish, “Ukraine conflict: ‘White power’ warrior from Sweden,” the Telegraph would publish, “Ukraine crisis: the neo-Nazi brigade fighting pro-Russian separatists,” and Al Jazeera would publish, “Driven by far-right ideology, Azov Battalion mans Ukraine’s front line.” Each would in turn, admit that literal Nazis are fighting on behalf of the NATO-backed regime in Kiev – with the regime itself raising ultra-right, Neo-Nazi battle formations. But each would also attempt to downplay the implications and role of Nazism within the ongoing conflict.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); That was until Foreign Policy magazine published its article, praising what it called, “fascist defenders of freedom.” It’s article titled, “Preparing For War with Ukraine’s Fascist Defenders of Freedom,” claims:
The Azov Battalion — so named for the Sea of Azov on which this industrial city is located — is one of dozens of volunteer battalions fighting alongside pro-government forces in eastern Ukraine. After separatist troops and armor attacked from the nearby Russian border and took the neighboring town of Novoazovsk, this openly neo-Nazi unit has suddenly found itself defending the city against what Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko called a Russian invasion. Pro-Russian forces have said they are fighting against Ukrainian nationalists and “fascists” in the conflict, and in the case of Azov and other battalions, these claims are essentially true. Effectively, Foreign Policy finally admits that indeed, warnings that NATO was backing literal Nazis in Ukraine were more than mere “Kremlin propaganda,” but rather the unequivocal truth. Foreign Policy would continue by reporting:
Besides a strong defense, Ukraine needs the support of the West to defeat the invaders, Odnorozhenko argued. He called for the Europe and the United States to take a more aggressive stance on Russia and begin shipping weapons to Ukrainian pro-government forces. And that is precisely what the United States and Europe are attempting to do – begin shipping more weapons and other forms of lethal aid to continue propping up the regime in Kiev. By embracing the Nazi militants fighting on behalf of Kiev, and simply claiming Russia is “worse,” the West can repeat the strategy it used in Syria after it became apparent that militants fighting the government in Damascus were hardcore terrorists driven by sectarian extremism and aligned to Al Qaeda.

In fact, it was also Foreign Policy who, in mid-2012, published an article titled, “Two Cheers for Syrian Islamists: So the rebels aren’t secular Jeffersonians. As far as America is concerned, it doesn’t much matter.”

The FP article also attempted to create a narrative that portrayed the Syrian government as a more pressing issue than revelations that NATO-backed militants were sectarian extremists, not the “pro-democracy freedom fighters” they were portrayed as being during and directly after the so-called “Arab Spring.” Foreign Policy would also create an array of excuses explaining why militants were extremists – a strategy expected to play out again as Kiev’s Nazism continues to emerge into greater public view.

By embracing and excusing two abhorrent ideologies and the heavily armed militant groups espousing them, NATO is able to continue backing both terrorists in Syria and Nazis in Ukraine. With the burden of covering up Nazism in Ukraine “off NATO’s chest,” it can commit to a more aggressive strategy of arming and aiding them.

Direct NATO Intervention

The self-destructive fleeing forward of the West generally takes the form of political destabilizations, terrorism, false-flag attacks, incremental mission creep, and covert proxy wars. What it has learned from Russia in both 2008 in Georgia and again this year in Crimea, is that direct, unpredictable, bold moves can pay off.

NATO recently has been very public in stating it has no intention of intervening in Ukraine. Since NATO perpetually keeps the threat of military intervention “on the table” for all other conceivable conflicts across the planet, it is strange that both it, and its proxy regime in Kiev, have gone through extra efforts to insist such a scenario in Ukraine is neither desired, nor even “on the table.”

With NATO building up troops in Eastern Europe, and its attempts to lull Russia into a false sense of security, planners in Moscow, eastern Ukrainians confronting NATO-backed troops on the battlefield in Ukraine, and in theaters across the region, sudden NATO intervention must be accounted for, as well as a swift counterstroke to disrupt what will be a precarious proposition for Western interests unaccustomed to such a risky move, and merely depending on shock, awe, and surprise to follow it through.

Incremental Escalation

Barring a negotiated settlement brokered by Kiev that sees its forces withdrawn from eastern Ukraine and contested provinces forfeited to rebels, it is likely NATO will continue incremental escalation combining both an increasingly aggressive strategy of arming and aiding Kiev’s forces regardless of their overt Nazism, as well as an incremental NATO build-up along Ukraine’s borders and covertly within them.

Whether NATO commits to a more desperate strategy entirely depends on whether or not this incremental escalation can continue at a quicker pace than the regime in Kiev can collapse.

With NATO and the special interests driving its agenda failing in Ukraine and floundering in Syria, the West has exhibited signs of dangerous desperation causing lapses in judgement and an overall lack of deep, coherent, strategic planning. It has gone from forcing its enemies to react to its provocations in 2011, to a series of backpedaling reactions in the face of formidable counterstrokes made in return ever since. An enemy that is desperate, is an enemy that is dangerous. Feeling it has nothing to lose, it may commit to an increasingly reckless strategy of provocations in hopes that its enemies’ caution and reason force them to back down.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine New Eastern Outlook”, where this first appeared.

ISIS is America’s New Terror Brand

Activist Post -

Endless Propaganda Fuels “War on Terror”

Image Credit: Vice NewsJames F. Tracy 
Activist Post

In the wake of World War I, erstwhile propagandist and political scientist Harold Lasswell famously defined propaganda as “the management of collective attitudes” and the “control over opinion” through “the manipulation of significant symbols.”[1]

The extent to which this tradition is enthusiastically upheld in the West and the United States in particular is remarkable. The American public is consistently propagandized by its government and corporate news media on the most vital of contemporary issues and events. Deception on such a scale would be of little consequence if the US was not the most powerful economic and military force on earth.

A case in point is the hysteria Western news media are attempting to create concerning the threat posed by the mercenary-terrorist army now being promoted as the Islamic State of Iraq and Greater Syria, or “ISIS.”

As was the case with the US intelligence asset and bogey publicized as “Al Qaeda,” and Al Qaeda’s Syrian adjunct, “Al Nusra,” such entities are—apparently by design—inadequately investigated and defined by major news media. Absent meaningful historical context they usefully serve as another raison d’ểtre for America’s terminal “War on Terror.”

A seemingly obvious feature of such terrorist forces left unexamined by corporate media is that they are observably comprised of the same or comparable personnel unleashed elsewhere throughout the Middle East as part of a strategy proposed during the George W. Bush administration in 2007.[2]

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); With the above observations in mind, ISIS is well-financed, militarily proficient, and equipped with modern vehicles and weaponry. It also exhibits an uncanny degree of media savvy in terms of propagating its message in professional-looking videos and on platforms such as YouTube and Twitter. “Western intelligence services,” the New York Times reports, claim to be “worried about their extraordinary command of seemingly less lethal weapons: state-of-the-art videos, ground images shot from drones, and multilingual Twitter messages.”[3]

Along these lines, ISIS even received a largely sympathetic portrayal in a five-part series produced and aired by the Rupert Murdoch-backed Vice News.[4] Indeed, Vice News’ “The Spread of the Caliphate” is reminiscent of the public relations-style reportage produced via the “embedding” of corporate news media personnel with US and allied forces during the 2003 conquest of Iraq.

The overt support of ISIS, combined with the fact that it is battling the same Syrian government the Obama administration overtly sought to wage war against just one year ago, strongly suggest the organization’s sponsorship by Western intelligence and military interests.

ISIS’s curious features are readily apparent to non-Western news outlets and citizenries. For example, Iran’s PressTV recently asked its readership, “Why does the ISIL have such easy access to Twitter, Youtube and other social media to propagate its ideologies?” The answer choices are, “1) Because the ISIL has very capable technicians who can best use social media, or 2) Because the US and Britain have provided the ISIL with unrestricted social media platform[s].” Note that the first choice is the overarching assumption of Western media outlets. Yet perhaps unsurprisingly, 90 percent of PressTV readers selected choice two.[5]

No such queries are so much as alluded to by major corporate media, all of which are united in the notion that ISIS is an essentially indigenous phenomenon. Yet as coverage of the events of September 11, 2001 and subsequent state-sponsored terrorism indicates, such media are essentially a component of the national security state, their reports and broadcast scripts all but overtly written by intelligence and military organizations.

In the wake of 9/11 US news media seldom asked about the origins of Al Qaeda—particularly how it was a product of US intelligence agencies. With the history of Al Qaeda omitted, the Bush administration was permitted to wage war on Afghanistan almost immediately following those staged attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon.

Yet as is much the case with today’s manufactured ISIS phenomenon, that history was readily available, and its careful public examination might have implicated the United States intelligence community in the 9/11 attacks. “During the Cold War, but also in its aftermath,” Michel Chossudovsky observes,
the CIA—using Pakistan’s military intelligence apparatus as a “go between”—played a key role in training the Mujhadeen. In turn, the CIA-sponsored guerrilla training was integrated with the teachings of Islam. Both the Clinton and Bush administrations have consistently supported the “Militant Islamic Base”, including Osama bin Laden’s Al Qaeda, as part of their foreign policy agenda. The links between Osama bin Laden and the Clinton administration in Bosnia and Kosovo are well documented by congressional records.[6]As the United States and world approach the thirteenth anniversary of the most momentous false flag in modern history, the American public would be well-served to remind itself that ISIS is the new Al Qaeda—in other words, the new pretext that will in all likelihood be used by to take police state measures at home and military aggression abroad to new, perhaps unprecedented, levels.

With the above in mind, it is telling that one of the US government’s greatest fears isn’t ISIS at all.
“The FBI’s most recent threat assessment for domestic terrorism makes no reference to Islamist terror threats,” the Washington Free Beacon reports, “despite last year’s Boston Marathon bombing and the 2009 Fort Hood shooting—both carried out by radical Muslim Americans.”

Instead, the nation’s foremost law enforcement agency is preoccupied with what it deems “domestic extremism” exhibited by its own subjects.[7] A primary manifestation of such “extremism” is possessing the curiosity to discern and seek out truths and information amidst the barrage of manipulated symbols the government and corporate-controlled media use to undermine a potentially informed public.


[1] Harold Lasswell, Propaganda Technique in the World War, Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 1927/1971.
[2] Seymour Hersh, “The Redirection: Is the Administration’s New Policy Benefitting Our Enemies in the War on Terrorism?” New Yorker, March 5, 2007; Tony Cartalucci, “Extremists Ravaging Syria Created by US in 2007,” Land Destroyer Report, May 11, 2012.
[3] Scott Shane and Ben Hubbard, “ISIS Displaying a Deft Command of Varied Media,” New York Times, August 30, 2014.
[4] Joe Bercovici, “Thanks to Rupert Murdoch, Vice is Worth $1.4 Billion. Could it be in Play Soon?Forbes, August 19, 2014; Medyan Dairieh, “The Spread of the Caliphate: The Islamic State,” Vice News, August 13, 2014.
[5] PressTV Poll, http://presstv.ir, retrieved on August 30, 2014.
[6] Michel Chossudovsky, America’s “War on Terrorism” Second Edition, Montreal CA: Global Research, 2005, 4.
[7] Bill Gertz, “FBI National Domestic Threat Assessment Omits Islamist Terrorism,” Washington Free Beacon, August 29, 2014.

This article first appeared at MemoryHoleBlog.com, the official blog of Dr. James Tracy.

The Self-Driving Car is Going to End in Disaster

Activist Post -

Joshua Krause
Activist Post

On the surface, self driving cars sounds like a godsend. You could sit back and relax during your commutes, safe in the knowledge that your computer-driven vehicle will get you to your destination safe and sound. “Safe” being the keyword here, because these vehicles will supposedly be safer than any human driver. The computer will never experience road rage or fatigue, and will have lightning fast reflexes. So far, Google’s test vehicles have driven over 700,000 thousand miles without incident.

However, we don’t really know how safe or effective they’ll be until ordinary drivers begin adopting the technology on a wider basis. Many of the test drives may have been restricted to ideal conditions. In California, for instance, Google has painstakingly mapped out 2000 miles of roadway for their testing, ignoring the other 172,000 miles of public roads. They’ve essentially created the perfect lab setting to test the technology, and their self-driving cars may not be prepared for real-world conditions.

Don’t tell that to Google though. They’re busy patting themselves on the back for driving 4,000,000 miles in a virtual matrix, and they have the gall to lobby the state in favor of virtual testing over real world experience. According to Google’s safety director:
"Computer simulations are actually more valuable, as they allow manufacturers to test their software under far more conditions and stresses than could possibly be achieved on a test track." He added: "Google wants to ensure that [the regulation] is interpreted to allow manufacturers to satisfy this requirement through computer-generated simulations."

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Unfortunately, lab conditions aren’t always reflective of reality are they? History is filled with examples of well-meaning people creating terrible disasters, all because what was on paper or what was simulated did not live up to the real world. Though I doubt this concerns Google very much. If their system fails to prevent an accident, they may not be liable. Car manufacturers may be able to figure out how to shed the financial responsibilities of an accident, by passing it onto you, the consumer.

One of biggest problems with self driving cars, is if you get into an accident, who’s to blame? Especially if we’re talking about a future where everyone is using automated vehicles. If there’s an accident, then the culprit is obvious. The program failed to prevent the accident, thus the programer is liable for the damages.

However, what if the manufacturers of the car and the programmers who created the software could give you a choice? One recent proposition is to allow you to choose how your vehicle would behave in an accident:
Car makers will obviously want to manage their risk by allowing the user to choose a policy for how the car will behave in an emergency. The user gets to choose how ethically their vehicle will behave in an emergency. The options are many. You could be:
  • Democratic and specify that everyone has equal value
  • Pragmatic, so certain categories of person should take precedence, as with the kids on the crossing, for example
  • Self-centered and specify that your life should be preserved above all
  • Materialistic and choose the action that involves the least property damage or legal liability.
Sounds great at first. You get to choose how your car will respond in an accident, based on your own personal ethics. Remember, though, no matter what you choose, you weren’t the one who programmed the car. The manufacturer gave you several generic presets that it designed. You’re still putting your life in the hands of some unseen programmer working for a major corporation with a bottom line.

Yet somehow you’ll still be the one who’s liable. That’s like handing a gun to an untrained adult and walking away. Even though it’s reckless of you to do so, you’re not legally responsible for anyone they shoot. Not so in this case. Unless you choose the most selfless option available, you run the risk of being liable for somebody else’s life or property.

Furthermore, how does insurance play into these choices? Will certain preset car behaviors cause your insurance to go up? If that’s the case, it may force lower income drivers into choosing options that don’t really reflect their interests or ethics. And say the insurance companies prefer that you choose the option that causes the least amount of property damage, will that actually amount to less deaths? Will your car choose to drive through a crosswalk rather than crashing into a Lamborghini?

My advice to you? Stick to using your brain to drive, at least for the first few years that these machines are rolled out. To me it looks like they’re going to give you these “choices” as an underhanded way of giving you all the risk and liability as they iron out the kinks in their fancy system. And there will be “kinks”. Never once has a new technology showed up on the scene in perfect working order. Being the first consumer to use this product is tantamount to becoming a guinea pig.

Joshua Krause is a reporter, writer and researcher at The Daily Sheeple, where this first appeared. He was born and raised in the Bay Area and is a freelance writer and author. You can follow Joshua’s reports at Facebook or on his personal Twitter. Joshua’s website is Strange Danger .

US Army Drills to Battle Political Dissent and Fight Crime in 'Megacities'

Activist Post -

Anthony Freda ArtEric BlairActivist Post

As we've witnessed recently in Ferguson, Missouri, the difference between police and military is already nearly indistinguishable. In other words, the Army is already taking on peaceful citizens in domestic cities. Tank-supported SWAT teams already grenade and raid homes to serve warrants for victimless, non-violent offenses. What more can they possibly train for?

The U.S. Army is now officially getting into the crime-fighting business. According to the Army Times, the Army is training to fight battles in megacities, not against other armies, but to help local authorities root out shadowy criminals, extremists and, wait for it, wait for it, influential political dissidents.

The Army Times reports on this year's Unified Quest war games drill:
When the Army looks to the future, it sees cities. Dense, sprawling, congested cities where criminal and extremist groups flourish almost undetected by authorities, but who can influence the lives of the population while undermining the authority of the state. And the service is convinced that these “megacities” of 20 million or more people will be the battleground of the future.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Talk about expanding the role of the armed forces. The Army has been training in urban warfare for decades geared toward fighting insurgents and terrorists (those who commit violence).

That's why this announcement is so stunning.  Look closely at the new definition of enemy:
Criminal and extremist groups...undetected by authorities, but who can influence the lives of the population while undermining the authority of the state.No mention of the word "violence" and it seems like they're targeting political dissent. Indeed. Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster confirms the Army is "expanding these battlegrounds into other contested spaces like organized crime and politics."

Of course they did get around to mentioning terrorists and insurgents to justify operating in cities.

"The emergence of unregulated cities, or zones of disadvantage where traditional rule of law models do not apply, within otherwise functional cities, provides a potential haven for organized crime, terrorists and insurgents, from which they can organize and launch operations," the Army report stated.

If you give the Army a problem to solve they will come up with Army solutions. Here's some more meat from the article:
Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno’s Strategic Studies Group delivered a report to the chief in May claiming that “it is inevitable that at some point the United States Army will be asked to operate in a megacity and currently the Army is ill-prepared to do so.” The team of Army officers and civilian academics continued that “the problems found in megacities (explosive growth rates, vast and growing income disparity and a security environment that is increasingly attractive to the politically dispossessed) are landpower problems. Solutions, therefore, will require boots on the ground.” (emphasis added)Notable buzzwords: income disparity and politically dispossessed.

McMaster said the Army took lessons from Israel's siege of Gaza to use overwhelming force against civilian combatants. By 2030, the Army wants boots on the ground to have video and trigger access to predator drones and at their fingertips. It gets even creepier, they also tested "directed energy" weapons during this drill.
McMaster said that by 2030, the Army wants to provide infantry squads “access to aviation and air support and full-motion video, [along with] the ability to overwhelm the enemy during chance contact.” One of the key things is the firepower of the squad, particularly “shoulder-fired weapons capabilities, counter-defilade capabilities, as well as flying munitions and combined arms … mobile protected platforms capable of precision firepower.” Army gamers also explored potential directed-energy capabilities that “would allow U.S. to have direct-fire capabilities with significant logistics reduction, and to counter enemy long-range missile capability,” McMaster said.Finally, the Army also got to test out some new toys presumably given to them by the NSA. In the drill, they used technology for "anti-access techniques, conducting malware-like and electronic warfare attacks." This can be used for fun stuff like killing livestream feeds during police brutality, like they did in Ferguson.

In many ways, Ferguson was a not just a test bed for many of these weapons but also to see how much the American people are willing to put up with under the right circumstances. These new Army drills clearly indicate that the "authority of the state" intends to confront politically disruptive Americans with military force.

Claiming the U.S. government was using tax dollars to build a vast militarized police state to be used against peaceful civilians used to be a conspiracy theory -- a paranoid fantasy involving full-spectrum Big Brother surveillance and technology kill switches, tanks rolling through American cities, masked soldiers battering into homes looking for flowers or political activists, armed drones over U.S. cities, columns of battle-trained soldiers patrolling the streets, and indefinite detention of suspected evil doers.

No reason to be paranoid. They are doing it for our safety. To protect us from those who may steal from us or threaten us with dangerous weapons, or from Peeping Toms who may spy on us, or from hackers who may steal our data, or from thugs who may kidnap us at gunpoint or, worse, murder us. Yes, thank goodness the authorities are protecting us from bad guys like that.

Recently by Eric Blair:

CDC whistleblower’s confession: his personal safety is still an issue

Activist Post -

Jon Rappoport
Activist Post

On August 27, CDC whistleblower William Thompson came out of the shadows and admitted he had omitted vital data from a 2004 study on the MMR vaccine and its connection to autism.

Thompson’s official statement was released through his Cincinnati attorney, Rick Morgan.

The key piece in Thompson’s statement is:

“I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics. The omitted data suggested that African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed.”

“My concern has been the decision to omit relevant findings in a particular study for a particular sub group for a particular vaccine. There have always been recognized risks for vaccination and I believe it is the responsibility of the CDC to properly convey the risks associated with receipt of those vaccines.”

Everything else in Thompson’s statement is backfill and back-pedaling and legal positioning and self-protection.

But this part, this is big. Within Thompson’s community of researchers and the general world of medical research and publishing, people know what it means.

It means major fraud.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Thompson, a co-author of the 2004 study, published in the prestigious journal Pediatrics, is admitting to egregious fraud. Cooking the data.

(Here are the authors and the name and reference number of the study in question: DeStefano F, Bhasin TK, Thompson WW, Yeargin-Allsopp M, Boyle C. “Age at first measles-mumps-rubella vaccination in children with autism and school-matched control subjects: a population-based study in metropolitan atlanta.” Pediatrics. 2004;3:259–266. The link to this study is here.)

In particular, omitting data which showed that African-American male babies who received the MMR vaccine were at a 340% increased risk of autism.

Omitting the data concealed this alarming fact from African-American families; and it also skewed the overall conclusion of the study, in order to exonerate the toxic MMR vaccine and give it a free pass.

You would be hard-pressed to find a researcher of Thompson’s reputation and position who has ever come out and confessed: My colleagues and I committed fraud; we published the fraud; we stood by the fraud for 10 years.


Major scandal. It directly indicts Thompson’s co-authors of the 2004 study, including the lead author, Frank DeStefano, who is also a CDC executive in charge of vaccine safety issues.

Now add to that: concealing the dangers of the MMR vaccine for ten years has resulted in untold numbers of cases of autism that could have been prevented.

Damaged lives of children. Damaged families.

Again, this is not someone coming in from the outside to criticize a published study. This is one of the co-authors of the study.

Thompson was there in 2004. He knows what happened. He participated, along with his colleagues, in a cover-up.

His co-authors are all recognized figures in the world of vaccine research: DeStefano; Tanya Karapurkar-Bhasin; Marshalyn Yeargin-Allsop; and Coleen Boyle.

They have all defended the safety of vaccines in other studies, which are now thrown into doubt. As in: dominoes falling.

Add these factors up and you get: front-page news.

You get a retraction of the 2004 study by Pediatrics, the journal that published it.

You get at least a cosmetic investigation of CDC practices by an outside special prosecutor.

You at least get a cosmetic Congressional hearing.

You get statements from Thompson’s co-authors. (So far, only Frank DeStefano has commented publicly, to reporter Sharyl Attkisson. His stuttering remarks are so garbled and nonsensical, they belong in a bad parody of science-speak.)

What have we gotten as a result of whistleblower Thompson’s confession?

From official sources: nothing of note. Zero.

From the mainstream press: nothing. Barely a whisper of coverage.

As I reported the other day, CNN ran a piece in which they called on co-author-of-fraud, DeStefano himself, to comment on the fraud, as if he were an outside objective expert. That’s quite a piece of journalism. DeStefano promptly invented a yarn about autism developing in utero, thus “proving” that vaccines couldn’t be responsible for autism.

William Thompson still has his job at the CDC. He has his lawyer, Rick Morgan. He undoubtedly has more knowledge and leads concerning fraud and lying about vaccines at the CDC.

Now we come to the issue of Thompson’s personal safety.

Apparently, there are people who take him seriously when he writes in his August 27 confession: “My colleagues and supervisors at the CDC have been entirely professional since this matter became public. In fact, I received a performance-based award after this story came out. I have experienced no pressure or retaliation and certainly was not escorted from the building, as some have stated.”

Thompson’s colleagues and supervisors at the CDC have been “entirely professional” because they’re in a box. Thompson’s name is out there. Even before his name was out there, his anonymous audio confession was available online, and Dr. Brian Hooker, to whom he confessed, and Andrew Wakefield knew who he was.

In fact, many people knew the title of the fraudulent 2004 study, and anyone could read the names of the authors and figure out the identity of the whistleblower.

Thompson was actually getting protection from online alternative media.

Making it more difficult for the CDC to take punitive action against him.

And what about Thompson’s claim that he received a performance-based honorary CDC award since “the story came out”? An award based on what? His exposure of fraud at the CDC? You mean someone took an old photo of Thompson and typed under it, “Good work, Bill”?

If this award referred to other work Thompson did before the scandal blew up, it was given to him, rather than canceled, for appearance’s sake only. As if to say: “The CDC welcomes internal criticism from its own employees.”

If you believe that, I have condos for sale on Jupiter.

Thompson claims he was not escorted from the campus at the CDC, once the scandal began to blow up. I wrote that he was escorted off the scene. I consider the source on this reliable. I relayed this information to another source close to Thompson, who said he hadn’t heard that, but that Thompson “had a problem with security guards” at the CDC campus.

There are actually people who believe Thompson has sailed through this whole scandal, so far, with nary a single problem at his workplace, the CDC, and that the CDC is a peachy keen place for employees and is eager to correct its own mistakes.

It’s all very professional and wonderful, and when an internal whistleblower confesses to a very serious crime of fraud, the boys and girls gather around a table and say, “Gee, Bill, show us exactly where an error was made in this study, so we can examine it. We just want to get things right.”

If that were true, why was William Thompson hiding in the shadows for 10 years? Why did he only come out when his identity was revealed by others?

Yes, revealed by others.

Here are Thompson’s own words on that subject, from his August 27th public statement:

“…nor was I given any choice regarding whether my name would be made public or my voice would be put on the Internet.”

Thompson is admitting he was outed. This is very much like saying, “I would have stayed anonymous forever, if I hadn’t been dragged into the light.”

Now, look at yet another remark Thompson made in his public confession, and decide whether this is sheer PR, written to assuage his employers at the CDC and protect himself from blowback and harm: “I would never suggest that any parent avoid vaccinating children of any race.”

Really, Bill? Let me get this straight. You buried data which showed a 340% increased risk of autism, in African-American male babies, after they received the MMR vaccine—but African-American parents should continue to submit their babies to the MMR vaccine. Right?

Because of Thompson’s claim that he and the CDC are on the same page, others have concluded that Thompson is in no danger. “The professionals are working out the scientific problems and all is well.”

How naïve. How incredibly naïve.

The CDC is a PR agency for the pharmaceutical cartel. That is its real function. You can bet CDC executives are keeping their pharmaceutical betters in the loop on “The Thompson Affair.”

Hundreds of billions of vaccine dollars are at stake.

Thompson knows, by going public, he has done something no researcher is supposed to do. He’s cast grave suspicion on his co-authors and on the CDC, to whom he’s taken an oath of silence. He’s broken that oath.

Violating omerta carries consequences.

William Thompson is claiming he won’t talk to reporters. That was also part of his August 27th statement. We’ll see if he holds to this promise. He and his lawyer may discover talking to reporters is his only option. For the sake of protection.

If Thompson comes out, he’d better insist on a live, uncensored, uncut video interview—done simultaneously in front of several different crews, uploaded in real time to dozens of sites, whereupon it can travel around the world in a matter of seconds.

And his security had better be excellent.

If he plans to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

NATO Membership For Ukraine – Another Move On The Grand Chessboard

Activist Post -

image sourceBrandon Turbeville 
Activist Post

As the geopolitical tug of war continues to take place over the ravaged country of Ukraine, both sides of the conflict – NATO and Russia – have begun taking steps toward a more solidified structure of alliances that will no doubt have massive reverberations across the world and possibly lead to direct confrontation between nuclear powers.

Indeed, as further evidence that the Western NATO bloc desires an ultimate conflict with Russia and the BRICS powers, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen has indicated that Ukraine is firmly on the path to become an eventual member of the NATO alliance.

Simultaneously, West Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseny Yatseniyuk submitted a bill to the Ukrainian Verkhovna Rada that would cancel Ukraine’s “non-aligned” status and restart Ukraine’s official attempt to become a member of NATO.

Yatsenyuk also revealed that the ultimate goal of Ukraine is to become a member of the European Union. For that reason, the bill would also ban Ukraine from “joining any political unions which would prevent it from eventually achieving” membership in the EU. The “political unions” which Yatsenyuk and his NATO backers are most concerned with are the Eurasian Economic Community and the Eurasian Customs Union; both political unions created and maintained by Russia which many see as the tentacles of the old Soviet Union.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Yatsenyuk asked Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko to classify the bill as urgent and to fast track a vote on the legislation as soon as possible.

Ukrainian Defense Minister Arsen Avakov described the decision to submit the legislation as “a very correct one.”

On his Facebook page, Avakov revealed the provocative and strategic nature of the decision by writing “If the parliament approves it, the path to NATO will be open. Only madmen would counter such a decision in the current situation.”

NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen stated that “This is a fundamental principle that each and every nation has an inherent right to decide itself, on its security policies and its alliance affiliations.” He reiterated that NATO would indeed be willing to consider Ukrainian membership.

A push for Ukrainian membership is not a new concept, of course. As far back as 2008, the idea that Ukraine would eventually become a NATO member was floated during the Bucharest Summit. This new push, however, is clearly an attempt to provoke Russia and back Putin into a corner politically and militarily. This, of course, has been the plan of the NATO leadership for some time as well as the doctrine of Zbigniew Brzezinski and the will of the world oligarchy.

Russian Response

Russia, however, has not sat idly by while NATO has attempted to push itself up to Russia’s doorstep. On August 31, 2014, Russian President Vladimir Putin stated that it was time to consider the options surrounding the Eastern portion of Ukraine.

In an interview with Russian state television, Putin stated “We need to immediately begin substantive talks on questions of the political organization of society and statehood for southeastern Ukraine with the goal of protecting the lawful interests of the people who live there."

Although the meaning behind Putin’s statement is somewhat murky, the Western propaganda mouthpiece, The Huffington Post, reported that the Russian position is not supportive of sovereignty for the Eastern separatist region of Ukraine.

Of course, this stands in the face of the fact that Russia has repeatedly made calls (at least publicly) for dialogue between Eastern and Western Ukraine and has also publicly expressed a desire for a decentralization of power and a sensible form of government resembling that of a confederacy.

A more sensible translation of the Russian statement, however, was provided by the Interpreter magazine. According to the Interpreter, the statement reads, “We must immediately get down to a substantial, substantive negotiations, and not on technical questions, but on the questions of the political organization of society and statehood in the south-east of Ukraine with the purpose of unconditional provision of the lawful interests of people who live there.”

It should be noted, however, that the Interpreter itself points out that “the word Putin used in Russian is "gosudarstvennost," which means literally "statehood" but can also mean "state system" or "state organization," i.e. form of government,” making Putin’s statement sound much less apocalyptic. This is a technical detail that most Western media outlets are leaving out.

Nevertheless, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko has also publicly expressed interest in the idea as have the Eastern Separatists. However, the separatists have demanded that Kiev halt its military offensive while talks take place, a condition that Poroshenko and Kiev have consistently refused to meet.

It is in regards to this stubbornness that Putin stated “If anybody believes that in a situation where the cities and villages of east Ukraine come under direct fire that the militiamen will have no reaction to that, but will simply wait for the promised talks, then these people are prisoner to some illusions.”

While Putin’s statements are still unclear in terms of the specifics, Western media outlets will waste no time in portraying them as an attempt to annex Eastern Ukraine in the same way that Crimea was annexed previously. While this may well be Russia’s goal, it could be that Russia is merely attempting to end the violence at its doorstep or to create an independent neutral state at its border so as to provide a buffer from NATO forces now openly creeping towards Moscow. Regardless, it should never be forgotten that whatever Russia’s action in Ukraine, it is entirely defensive in nature. After all, it was the Western NATO powers that created the Ukrainian crisis to begin with.

NATO Membership For Ukraine – Another Move On The Grand Chessboard

When one analyzes the perspective of the NATO powers, what is clear is that the Brzezinski doctrine as espoused in The Grand Chessboard is very much alive and well and, indeed, being implemented in Ukraine.

In The Grand Chessboard, Brzezinski argues that the expansion of NATO and the European Union will serve to reinvigorate greater Europe as well as act as the proverbial carrot by which the more Central and Eastern European countries will be encouraged to facilitate and implement the will of the Anglo-Europeans. The failure to do so, however, runs the risk of awakening a historical Russian imperialism that could challenge Anglo-European hegemony, according to Brzezinski. He writes,
It follows that a wider Europe and an enlarged NATO will serve well both the short-term and the longer-term goals of U.S. policy. A larger Europe will expand the range of American influence – and, through the admission of new Central European members, also increase in the European councils the number of states with a pro-American proclivity – without simultaneously create a Europe politically so integrated that it could soon challenge the United States on geopolitical matters of high importance to America elsewhere, particularly in the Middle East. A politically defined Europe is also essential to the progressive assimilation of Russia into a system of global cooperation. Admittedly, America cannot on its own generate a more united Europe – that is up to the Europeans, especially the French and the Germans – but America can obstruct the emergence of a more united Europe. And that could prove calamitous for stability in Eurasia and thus also for America’s own interests. Indeed, unless Europe becomes more united, it is likely to become more disunited again. Accordingly, as stated earlier, it is vital that America work closely with both France and Germany and seeking a Europe that is politically viable, a Europe that remains linked to the United States, and a Europe that widens the scope of the cooperative democratic international system.[1] [...] The enlargement of NATO and the EU would serve to reinvigorate Europe’s own waning sense of a larger vocation, while consolidating, to the benefit of both America and Europe, the democratic gains won through the successful termination of the Cold War. At stake in this effort is nothing less than America’s long-range relationship with Europe itself. A new Europe is still taking shape, and if that new Europe is to remain geopolitically a part of the “Euro-Atlantic” space, the expansion of NATO is essential. By the same token, a failure to widen NATO, now that the commitment has been made, would shatter the concept of an expanding Europe and demoralize the Central Europeans. It could even reignite currently dormant or dying Russian geopolitical aspirations in Central Europe. Indeed, the failure of the American-led effort to expand NATO could reawaken even more ambitious Russian desires. It is not yet evident – and the historical record is strongly to the contrary – that the Russian political elite shares Europe’s desire for a strong and enduring American political and military presence. Therefore, while the fostering of an increasingly cooperative relationship with Russia is clearly desirable, it is important for America to send a clear message about its global priorities. If a choice has to be made between a larger Euro-Atlantic system and a better relationship with Russia, the former has to rank incomparably higher to America.[2] Brzezinski goes on to describe the framework of an arrangement between the West and Russia that would have very little – if any – benefits to Russia. His requirements are essentially that Russia be neutered with respect to its ability to make effective and influential regional decisions, that it strategically weaken itself militarily, and even reorganize its governmental structure to the form of a confederacy with three co-equal parts. He writes,
For that reason, any accommodation with Russia on the issue of NATO enlargement should not entail an outcome that has the effect of making Russia a defacto decision-making member of the alliance, thereby diluting NATO’s special Euro-Atlantic character while simultaneously relegating its newly admitted members to second-class status. That would create opportunities for Russia to resume not only the effort to regain a sphere of influence in Central Europe but to use its presence within NATO to play on any American-European disagreements in order to reduce the American role in European affairs. It is also crucial that, as Central Europe enters NATO, any new security assurances to Russia regarding the region be truly reciprocal and thus mutually reassuring. Restrictions on the deployment of NATO troops and nuclear weapons on the soil of new members can be an important factor in allaying legitimate Russian concerns, but these should be matched by symmetrical Russian assurances regarding the demilitarization of the potentially strategically menacing salient of Kaliningrad and by limits on major troop deployments near the borders of the prospective new members of NATO and the EU. While all of Russia’s newly independent western neighbors are anxious to have a stable and cooperative relationship with Russia, the fact is that they continue to fear it for historically understandable reasons. Hence, the emergence of an equitable NATO/EU accommodation with Russia would be welcomed by all Europeans as a signal that Russia is finally making the much-desired postimperial choice in favor of Europe. Russia’s longer-term role in Eurasia will depend largely on the historic choice that Russia has to make, perhaps still in the course of this decade, regarding its own self-definition. Even with Europe and China increasing the radius of their respective regional influence, Russia will remain in charge of the world’s largest single piece of real estate. It spans ten time zones and is territorially twice as large as either the United States or China, dwarfing in that regard even an enlarged Europe. Hence, territorial deprivation is not Russia’s central problem. Rather, the huge Russia has to face squarely and draw the proper implications from the fact that both Europe and China are already economically more powerful and that China is also threatening to outpace Russia on the road to social modernization. In these circumstances, it should become more evident to the Russian political elite that Russia’s first priority is to modernize itself rather than to engage in a futile effort to regain its former status as a global power. Given the enormous size and diversity of the country, a decentralized political system, based on the free market, would be more likely to unleash the creative potential of both the Russian people and the country’s vast natural resources. In turn, such a more decentralized Russia would be less susceptible to imperial mobilization. A loosely confederated Russia – composed of a European Russia, a Siberian Republic, and a Far Eastern Republic – would find it easier to cultivate closer economic regulations with Europe, with the new states of Central Asia, and with the Orient, which would thereby accelerate Russia’s own development. Each of the three confederated entities would also be more able to tap local creative potential, stifled for centuries by Moscow’s heavy bureaucratic hand.[3] It is important to note that, when Brzezinski states that a “decentralized political system, based on the free market,” is desired for Russia, he means a system that is built on privatization, unfettered Capitalism, and the ability of private corporations to loot and exploit “the country’s vast natural resources” as well as its people.

Furthermore, Brzezinski argues that another requirement that West should impose upon Russia is the acceptance of the increase of the sense of nationalism among the countries located in its generally accepted sphere of influence and its national borders. While these countries clearly have a right to their own self-determination and nationalistic identities, Brzezinski is referring more to the radicalization and exploitation of these tendencies than the acceptance of a people's right to rule themselves free from outside interference. Brzezinski’s requirement would thus only be accepted by Russia to its own detriment. In this regard, he states,
A clear choice by Russia in favor of the European option over the imperial one will be more likely if America successfully pursues the second imperative strand of its strategy toward Russia: namely, reinforcing the prevailing geopolitical pluralism in the post-Soviet space. Such reinforcement will serve to discourage any imperial temptations. A postimperial and Europe-oriented Russia should actually view American efforts to that end as helpful in consolidating regional stability and in reducing the possibility of conflicts along its new, potentially unstable southern frontiers. But the policy of consolidating geopolitical pluralism should not be conditioned on the existence of a good relationship with Russia. Rather, it is also important insurance in case such a good relationship fails to truly develop, as it creates impediments to the reemergence of any truly threatening Russian imperial policy.[4] Brzezinski also points to the importance of Ukraine to his anti-Russian policy. He writes,
It follows that political and economic support for the key newly independent states is an integral part of a broader strategy for Eurasia. The consolidation of a sovereign Ukraine, which in the meantime redefines itself as a Central European state and engages in closer integration with Central Europe, is a critically important component of such a policy, as is the fostering of a closer relationship with such strategically pivotal states as Azerbaijan and Uzbekistan, in addition to the more generalized effort to open up Central Asia (in spite of Russian impediments) to the global economy. Large-scale international investment in an increasingly accessible Caspian – Central Asian region would not only help to consolidate the independence of its new countries but in the long run would also benefit a postimperial and democratic Russia. The tapping of the region’s energy and mineral resources would generate prosperity, prompting a greater sense of stability and security in the area, while perhaps also reducing the risks of Balkan-type con-external investment, would also radiate to the adjoining Russian provinces, which tend to be economically underdeveloped. Moreover, once the region’s new ruling elites come to realize that Russia acquiesces in the region’s integration into the global economy, they will become less fearful of the political consequences of close economic relations with Russia. In time, a nonimperial Russia could thus gain acceptance as the region’s preeminent economic partner, even though no longer its imperial ruler.[5] It must be remembered that Brzezinski, when discussing the “choices” available to Russia in terms of its place in the world, stated that Russia would “either [choose] to be a part of Europe as well or [choose] to become a Eurasian outcast, neither truly of Europe nor Asia and mired in its ‘near abroad’ conflicts.”[6]

Notice that, in this statement, the choices provided to Russia by Brzezinski’s philosophy are between total fealty to the European Soviet and total irrelevance. No self-respecting nation would choose either of these two options for its future and this is a fact that Brzezinski is undoubtedly aware of. Thus, it is clear that the Russians are being faced with the non-choice that is the Brzezinski doctrine, a philosophy that, when put into practice, makes conflict virtually inevitable.

Russia is thus faced with the choice of willing subservience or a growing NATO and Europe that will inevitably come knocking on its door for “access” to its vast oil and mineral wealth and demand that whatever political clout it may have in the world be erased.

These types of requirements and conditions cannot help but initiate a direct confrontation.

Solutions For The Ukrainian Crisis

A sensible and more practical set of general solutions to the political crisis in Ukraine can be summed up in five points:

1.) The United States and its allies must immediately cease supporting hostilities against the Eastern regions of Ukraine. The U.S. must tell its stooges in Kiev to immediately halt the military offensive in the East and begin talks with separatist leaders.

2.) The United States should take the lead in opposing Ukrainian membership in the NATO alliance.

3.) Ukraine should remain intact as a nation, but, due to the vast cultural differences and the level of mistrust resulting from the civil war and indiscriminate killings of civilians in East Ukraine by Western Ukrainian forces, Ukraine should be reincorporated as a type of two-state confederacy on the model of Switzerland. A sensible border would be the Dnieper River with Kiev, which sits on the river, remaining the capital of the country.

4.) Immediate declaration of neutrality by Ukraine. While Ukraine should not become a member of NATO, nor should it become absorbed by the Russian machine. Ukraine would thus provide a natural barrier and neighbor of good faith between NATO, the EU, and Russia. Rivalry between the three surrounding powers should only take the form of competition for improved international relations, trade, and development.

5.) An end to IMF Austerity conditions. An American, European, Russian and/or an international effort to assist Ukraine in domestic rebuilding and development programs that work in tandem with a sophisticated domestic recovery program involving a nationalized Ukrainian central bank, 0% interest credit from that central bank for infrastructure, development, industrial development, and education.

Instead of improved international relations, however, the world oligarchy is intent on inciting greater confrontation between forces inside Ukraine and, of course, between NATO and Russia. Instead of international development, increased living standards, a cleaner environment, and a peaceful and robust economy, the world oligarchy intends to provide de-industrialization, lower living standards, pollution, war and austerity.

Americans and the rest of the world are faced with a choice. They can succumb to propaganda, remain vapid and apathetic or they can engage reality and become active participants in the affairs of the world.

The results of these choices should be clear to anyone who considers what is at stake.


[1] Brzezinski, Zbigniew. The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives. Basic Books. 1997. P. 199.
[2] Brzezinski, Zbigniew. The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives. Basic Books. 1997. Pp. 200-201.
[3] Brzezinski, Zbigniew. The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives. Basic Books. 1997. Pp. 201-202
[4] Brzezinski, Zbigniew. The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives. Basic Books. 1997. P. 202-203.
[5] Brzezinski, Zbigniew. The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives. Basic Books. 1997. P. 203.
[6] Brzezinski, Zbigniew. The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives. Basic Books. 1997. P.122

Recently from Brandon Turbeville:
Brandon Turbeville is an author out of Florence, South Carolina. He has a Bachelor's Degree from Francis Marion University and is the author of six books, Codex Alimentarius -- The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real ConspiraciesFive Sense Solutions and Dispatches From a Dissident, volume 1 and volume 2, and The Road to Damascus: The Anglo-American Assault on Syria. Turbeville has published over 300 articles dealing on a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville's podcast Truth on The Tracks can be found every Monday night 9 pm EST at UCYTV.  He is available for radio and TV interviews. Please contact activistpost (at) gmail.com. 

Cops to City Council: ‘We Were Given an Illegal Traffic Ticket Quota’

Activist Post -

Melissa Melton
Activist Post

For those who still say it’s a myth that cops are given quotas for how many tickets they have to write, maybe you’ve never been to Waldo, Florida. The National Motorists Association listed Waldo as the third worst speed trap for a town of 50,000 people or less in 2012, and it’s so bad, billboards like the one above are taken out to warn drivers before they get there.

But earlier this week, five police officers came forward to testify before the Waldo City Council that they are mandated to write a certain number of tickets each shift or face punishment — even though such a quota stands in direct violation of state law. Waldo, by the way, only has seven police officers to begin with.

The Gainesville Sun reported:
Before a packed room, Officer Brandon Roberts told commissioners they were required by Chief Mike Szabo to write 12 speeding citations per 12-hour shift or face punishment.

Roberts explained his claims with the help of an electronic presentation and printed emails as evidence.

“We’re doing this with a heavy heart,” Roberts said. “We would never want to go against our fellow officers but we have no faith in our chain of command.”

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); It was also noted that apparently half of the city’s $1 million budget comes from something officially listed as “police revenue”.

The officers also accused Chief Szabo of enforcing “questionable” traffic stops and abandoning his post and disabling equipment so none of the department staff could find him.

Szabo has since been suspended pending an investigation. Sadly, Waldo Police Cpl. Kenneth Smith, who was named interim chief following Szabo’s suspension, has also been suspended as well.

At least it’s nice to see a few honest cops for a change…

Melissa Melton is a writer, researcher, and analyst for The Daily Sheeple, where this first appeared, and a co-creator of Truthstream Media with Aaron Dykes, a site that offers teleprompter-free, unscripted analysis of The Matrix we find ourselves living in. Melissa also co-founded Nutritional Anarchy with Daisy Luther of The Organic Prepper, a site focused on resistance through food self-sufficiency. Wake the flock up!

Research Reveals How Sugar CAUSES Cancer

Activist Post -

The average American consumes their body weight annually in this cancer-causing substance, and yet hospitals freely feed it to their cancer patients, oblivious to the harm it does.

Sayer Ji
Activist Post

Hospitals feed cancer patients sugar and high carbohydrate diets for a reason: they are abysmally ignorant of the role of nutrition in health and disease -- hence their burgeoning growth and packed rooms.

Even though the science itself shows – at least since the mid-'20s with Otto Warburg's cancer hypothesis -- that tumors prefer to utilize sugar fermentation to produce energy rather than the much more efficient oxygen-based phosphorylation* – hospitals have actually invited corporations like McDonald's to move into their facilities to 'enhance' their patient's gustatory experience, presumably to provide comfort and take the edge off of the painful surgery, radiation and chemo treatments erroneously proffered to them as the only reasonable 'standard of care.'

But the times are changing, with new research requiring these medical institutions to reform their dietary strategies, at least if they wish to claim that their interventions are in fact 'evidence-based' ...

New Study Reveals Sugar Doesn't Just Feed But Causes Cancer

A groundbreaking new study, uncovered by one of our volunteer researchers at Greenmedinfo – Jonathan Middleton – is the first of its kind to identify sugar, not only as  fuel source for an already existing cancer, but as a primary driver in oncogenesis – i.e. the initiation of cancerous characteristics (phenotype) within previously healthy cells.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Published in the Journal of Cliinical Investigation and titled, Increased sugar uptake promotes oncogenesis via EPAC/RAP1 and O-GlcNAc pathways, researchers addressed a common perception (or misperception) in the cancer research community regarding sugar's relationship to cancer: namely, "increased glycolysis [sugar based metabolis] is frequently viewed as a consequence of oncogenic events that drive malignant cell growth and survival."

Contrary to this conventional view, the new study "provide[s] evidence that increased glycolytic activation itself can be an oncogenic event..."  That is to say, the activation of sugar-based metabolism in a cell – driven by both the presence of increased quantities of glucose and the increase glucose receptors on the cell membrane surface (i.e. "overexpression of a glucose transporter") – drives cancer initiation.

Moreover, the study found that "Conversely, forced reduction of glucose uptake by breast cancer cells led to phenotypic reversion." In other words, interfering with sugar availability and uptake to the cell causes the cancer cell to REVERSE towards its pre-cancer structure-function (phenotype).

What Are The Implications of This Research to the Diet?

What this new research indicates is that sugar – of which Americans consume an astounding 160 lbs annually (imagine: 31 five-pound bags for each of us!) – is one of the primary causes of metabolic cell changes in the body consistent with the initiation and promotion of cancer. And, the research indicates that removing it from the diet, and depriving the cells of it, could REVERSE cancer.

Hidden Sugar, Crouching Cancer

It has been estimated by the USDA that the average American consumes 200 lbs of grain products annually. Why is this relevant to the question of sugar in the diet? Because refined carbohydrate products – e.g. crackers, bread, pasta, cereal – are actually 'hidden' forms of sugar. In fact, puffed rice causes your blood to become sweeter (and presumably feeds more cancer cells sugar) than white sugar, as it is higher on the glycemic index. Adding the two figures together – annual per capita consumption of sugar and grain-based products – we get a jaw dropping 360 lbs of sugar (both overt (table sugar/high fructose corn syrup) and covert (grain carbs) annually – all of which may contribute to promoting the ideal metabolic situation of cancer cells: aerobic glycolysis.

This is one reason why the ketogenic diet – that is, a fat- and protein-focused diet devoid of carbohydrate, both in simple (sugar) and complex (grain product) form – has been found so useful in the most aggressive of cancers: including brain cancer. Once you 'pull the rug out' from under the sugar/carb-craving cancer cells, they are forced to either undergo programmed cell death (apoptosis) or re-differentiate back into non-cancerous phenotypes.

If It's So Bad For Us, Why Do We Eat So Much?

One of the primary reasons why we eat sugar and carbohydrate rich diets is because they are addictive. Within minutes of consuming sugar/carbs our body goes through a neuroendocrine roller coaster. Your brain can not survive very long without glucose, the fundamental energy unit of the cell, and will 'freak out' if deprived of a steady stream of this 'nutrient' within only 2-3 minutes. The endocrine system, on the other hand, perceives the danger of high sugar – namely, glycation associated damage to protein and lipid structures within the cells of our body; think: blood caramelizing, getting sticky, and gumming up the finely tuned works – and will release hormones such as insulin, adrenaline and cortisol, in order to try to get the elevated sugar in the blood and tissues under control. Insulin forces the sugar into storage within the cell, both as glycogen and as fat, but often does its job too well, causing available glucose levels in the brain to be depleted – setting off a vicious cycle of 'emergency signals' telling the body to release more cortisol and adrenaline to increase the levels of glucose in the blood. This, of course, will result in additional insulin production and release, causing the same cycle to be repeated over and over again.

This seemingly endless vicious cycle is responsible for the insatiable cravings a high carb/sugar diet generates – not to mention the fructose-based hedonic effects generated in the brain that modulate both opioid and dopamine receptors in the nervous system (not unlike alcohol), and the pharmacologically active peptides in many gluten-containing grains, which also drive addictive behaviors and an almost psychotic fixation on getting carbs at each meal.

No wonder we have an epidemic of cancer in a world where the Westernized diet prevails. Certainly, we do not mean to indicate that a sugar/carb-rich diet is the only cause of cancer. There are many other factors that contribute to cancer initiation and promotion, such as:
  • Chemical exposure
  • Radiation exposure
  • Chronic stress that suppresses the immune system
  • Vaccines containing hidden retroviruses and cancer causing viruses
  • Natural infection with bacteria and viruses that are cancer causing
  • Lack of sleep
  • Insufficient nutrients (lack of methyl donors such as B12, folate, and B6 will prevent the body from 'turning off' (methylating) cancer-promoting genes
Even though cancer is a complex, multi-factorial phenomena, with variables we can not always control, one thing we can do is control what goes into our mouth. Sugar, for instance, does not belong there if we truly want to prevent and/or treat cancer.  And don't forget, carbohydrates that don't taste sweet on the front end – bread, crackers, cereal – certainly convert to sugar in the body within minutes post-consumption.

In a nutshell, if you are concerned about cancer, have cancer, or would like to prevent recurrence, removing sugar and excess carbohydrates is a must. Not only is it common sense, but it is now validated by experimental research.

 *Note: Cancer cells prefer to ferment sugar as a form of energy even when there is sufficient oxygen available to the cells to do so; hence Warburg's description of cancer metabolism as 'aerobic glycolysis' or the so-called 'Warburg effect'

This article first appeared at GreenMedInfo.  Please visit to access their vast database of articles and the latest information in natural health.

How Badly Is Fukushima Radiation Damaging the Pacific Ocean?

Activist Post -

Copyright Richard Wilcox 2014 Richard Wilcox, PhD
Activist Post

Although its heart is rich in pearls and ores 
The Sea complains upon a thousand shores
- Alexander Smith (1)

I watched some wonderful movies over the summer with “ocean” themes and one was with Robert Redford called All is Lost. The entertainment value was good but it also made a statement about Man's interference with Nature and how nature can strike back. I love films like All is Lost, Master and Commander, in which the imperial navy visits the Galapagos Islands and “Kon Tiki,” a story about a 4,000 mile trek across the ocean, because they show the unspeakable beauty and power of the world's great oceans. Can humans actually destroy them?

Over the past year we've read many news stories about mass die-offs of marine species in the Pacific Ocean and other regions. One hypothesis in the alternative media is that the massive radiation released from the Fukushima nuclear disaster is the cause. Others blame over-fishing, pollution or climatic events.

My opinion is that if the die-offs are unusual and “man made” then it is a combination of factors, but Fukushima is probably one of them. The Earth is under many human threats -- we are an industrious species -- Fukushima is doing the ocean only harm, and following that logic, at a minimum the health of local species and perhaps wider ecosystems are being affected in a reverse synergy whereby organisms have surpassed the limits they can endure.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Controversy and Denial

Folks love to argue about whether things like radiation has killed the ocean; whether global warming is real or not or caused by humans emitting CO2; or whether the Twin Towers on 9/11 were brought down with nanothermite or mini-nuke explosives. But in all three cases the harm that has been caused is uncontroversial. We should stop polluting the environment with harmful pollutants (such as sulfur dioxide from coal burning plants) and promote renewable energy sources; we know the official story of 9/11 is a total lie regardless of how the buildings were demolished (see, for example: Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth); and we know that whatever amount of radiation is leaking into the ocean it is a bad thing and needs to be stopped.

It appears that after three long years a group of scientists are finally going to have a meeting to discuss the effects of Fukushima on wildlife (2). Logical discourse, debate and scientific honesty are essential to finding consensus on how to solve the problem. However, our scientific and political institutions are often so inflexible that it's not easy to change course or offer reforms for improvement. And, let's face it, our economic and political system is rotten to the core (3; 4; 5; 6).

Fukushima Pumps Out Contamination

Tokyo Electric Power Company (Tepco) is the utility in charge of the (FNPP #1) Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant No. 1 (“dai-ichi). They recently admitted that FNPP#1 is releasing a whopping 150 billion becquerels of tritium and 7 billion becquerels of cesium and strontium of contaminated water, every day, into the ocean (7). Compare that to the Japanese government limit for food that does not allow over 100 becquerels per kilogram in food to be sold as produce.

Fukushima: Worst Nuclear Disaster In History

It is estimated by the State of California Natural Resources Agency that the initial Fukushima accident released nearly double the amount of radiation compared to Chernobyl (8).

No human worker can enter the areas around the FNPP#1 reactor buildings because it measures up to 10 sieverts per hour (9) due to the melted nuclear fuel which is scattered at various locations beneath the reactors.

10 sieverts equals10,000 millisieverts (a lifetime dose should not exceed 100 ms!) or 10 million microsieverts per hour, when a normal background rate might be around 0.05 up to 0.15 microsieverts per hour (10).

NHK claims the melted fuel has “cooled down” but so what? The Abe-controlled NHK wants to reassure the public with sugary, sprinkled donut language that “all is well” in Fukushima (11). If you compare the mild non-coverage that Fukushima gets in the Japanese domestic media versus the compendium of worries that independent researchers and scientists have documented it betrays the level of denial and helplessness on the part of the Japanese establishment versus grim reality (12).


Dr. Tim Mousseau has carried out extensive biological research at both Chernobyl and now Fukushima prefecture and found the same patterns of genetic mutations and damage to insects, birds and other organisms caused by the high doses of radiation released by the accidents (13).

War Is Peace, Slavery Is Freedom

In 2013, Dr. Chris Busby, an articulate chap of enormous integrity and “an expert on the health effects of ionizing radiation and Scientific Secretary of the European Committee on Radiation Risk,” stated -- in a fascinating interview about how the Nuclear/Military Industrial Complex buys their own scientists in order to produce fabricated results -- that Fukushima is “probably the worst public health scandal in human history” and that the “actual background rate for thyroid cancer in Japan is actually zero...[according to] a study done in 2005” (14; 15). The background rate before the disaster was zero.

It was recently announced that “[t]hyroid cancer [was] diagnosed in 104 young people” in Fukushima. However, “government officials in Fukushima say they do not believe the cases of thyroid gland cancer diagnosed or suspected in the 104 young people are linked to the 2011 nuclear accident” (16).

The article does not offer a counter argument for what might have caused the cancers, but some dissenting experts do think Fukushima is the cause. Oddly, the government is not carrying out thyroid cancer research in other regions farther away from the disaster site such as in Kagoshima or Okinawa in order to compare the data, and are apparently ignorant of the study Chris Busby dug up that indicated the zero incidence background rate prior to the disaster!

Considering that the normal rate of thyroid cancer in children is zero or very rare -- as it was just prior to the Chernobyl disaster -- the statement by officials that there is no link to the disaster is a shameless lie. But we are talking about genocidal psychopaths in the Nuclear Industry aren't we? (17)

The United Nations, whatever its good intentions, which controls the IAEA who in turn oversee global nuclear affairs, is a compromised institution when it comes to regulating the Nuclear-Military Psychopaths (NMP) (18).

Nuclear Power Causes Childhood Leukemia

Dr. Ian Fairlie is a rare breed of hard-headed and uncompromising scientist, not of the bought-and-paid-for variety. In a recent article he further exposes what has been known for decades by the Chris Busbys and Helen Caldicotts of this world, that even “properly” functioning nuclear power plants are dangerous. His research finds:
a highly statistically significant 37% increase in childhood leukemias within 5 km of almost all NPPs [nuclear power plants] in the UK, Germany, France and Switzerland. It’s perhaps not surprising that the latter 3 countries have announced nuclear phaseouts and withdrawals. It is only the UK government that remains in denial (19). Suffer The Little Children 

Considering the Nuclear Cartel's control over Japanese politics, blatant denial of statistical data in Europe and the way the UN is compromised, it's unsurprising to find that the Japanese government, prone to byzantine politics and opaque political processes to begin with, would lie about the effects of radiation on children.

The excellent website, Simply Info, opined that the recent findings of increasing cancers among Fukushima children exposes the government's deceptive handling of the issue:

“The Health Survey has been less than transparent in what data they release. Many times the data given makes it impossible to perform any sort of outside analysis or obtain a clear picture of what is going on. The survey has refused to release any sort of raw data or additional information in a way that allows for ... review or confirmation that their reports accurately present the real situation” (20).

Whither The Pacific Northwest?

Recently Dana Durnford who is true citizen-hero, is also a resident, fisherman and diver of the British of Columbia coastal area of Canada. He and a colleague did a survey of 200 km of the BC coast and found it to be practically lifeless of many normally thriving species (21). This is unprecedented according to Durnford who has lived and worked in the region for years and knows the topography and ecology there like the back of his hand. Is the cause due to Fukushima radiation?

This article from Washington’s Blog (WB) has some good maps that show how ocean currents are sweeping Fukushima radiation toward North America (22). The big question is about dispersion of radiation in the ocean: does it disperse and dilute and become harmless or is it concentrated enough to have an effect? A fisheries expert cited in the article argues that radiation is not the cause but WB refutes some of his claims. An anonymous person in the comment section purports a theory about radiation killing the plankton thereby screwing up the ocean ecology. It sounds like a reasonable hypothesis to me that should be investigated.

A Drop In The Ocean?

Returning to the argument of Dr. Chris Busby, while a lot of people make big statements about the death of the Pacific, he uses mathematical calculations to make his case. I have not seen his figures either verified or disputed by other scientists.

In his audio interview he noted he is aware that all of the radiation will not dilute uniformly and that various currents will concentrate the radiation in certain places but he does not believe the radiation will cause an ecological catastrophe because the ocean is just too darned big. Busby does emphasize the danger to Japan especially people living in the vicinity of Fukushima, but notes that even if the entire inventory of radioactive materials were to make it to the ocean, that the above ground atomic bomb tests released more radiation than Fukushima could.

If we add the bomb tests plus Fukushima, maybe the accumulation is something to worry about.

Here is what he wrote for Russia Today in 2013:
The...Pacific Ocean is big enough for this level of release not to represent the global catastrophe that some are predicting. Let’s get some scoping perspective on this. The volume of the North Pacific is 300 million cubic kilometers. The total inventory of the four Fukushima Daiichi reactors, including their spent fuel pools, is 732 tons of Uranium and Plutonium fuel which is largely insoluble in sea water. The inventory in terms of the medium half-life nuclides of radiological significance Cs-137, Cs-134 and Strontium-90, is 3 x 1018 becquerels (Bq) each. Adding these up gives about 1019 Bq. If we dissolve that entire amount into the Pacific, we get a mean concentration of 33 Bq per cubic meter - not great, but not lethal. Of course this is ridiculous since the catastrophe released less than 1017 Bq of these combined nuclides and even if all of this ends up in the sea (which it may do), the overall dilution will result in a concentration of 1 Bq per cubic meter. So the people in California can relax. In fact, the contamination of California and indeed the rest of the planet from the global weapons test fallout of 1959-1962 was far worse, and resulted in the cancer epidemic which began in 1980. The atmospheric megaton explosions drove the radioactivity into the stratosphere and the rain brought it back to earth to get into the milk, the food, the air, and our children’s bones. Kennedy and Kruschev called a halt in 1963, saving millions (Op. cit.). Copyright Richard Wilcox 2014
Deep Sea Snooze Fuguheads Furrowed In Ocean Floor

Mainstream science websites like Deep Sea News posit that there is no threat whatsoever from Fukushima radiation, yet devote very little attention to the issue other than to deride those are worried about it (23). In one of their rare articles on the topic I read some months ago, there had previously been a long and thoughtful debate in the comment section among some of their critics, even mainstream scientists, who chastised DSN for so handily dismissing the radiation threat. Recently when I checked the site all of those comments had been deleted and no new articles on the topic had since been published. Only those who cheerlead for their website are allowed to publish comments.

Science follows funding, and promoting the anthropogenic theory of global warming (AGW) pays better than locking horns with the nuclear industry (big bucks military industrial complex). In the meantime, promoters of Al Gore's official religion, AGW, had to come up with a computer model to explain why global warming is on hiatus until 2030, but don't worry, it will be back and so will their funding (24).

The Cosmic Convergence Group has just published a lengthy essay that goes into multiple causes of climate change, and while acknowledging the reality of AGW disagree with the way it has been over emphasized and politicized and instead offer a scientific analysis of complex, interrelated phenomenon (25).

As one observer noted to me regarding ocean collapse and climate change:
I think its a state-change in the Pacific eco-system and that Fukushima was simply the precipitating catalyst (26). Entropy was rising in the Pacific for many reasons but whole-scale chemical and elemental contamination (e.g., lead, mercury, uranium, strontium) had already pushed the world's oceans towards state change. There are also quite a few earth changes that have increased ocean acidification. I really think the climate change problem distracts from the more encompassing problem of broad scale eco-system collapse. (Maija Nadesan, personal email communication, August 29, 2014). The Knowledge Gap And Pacific Marine Species Die-Offs

Nancy Foust of Simply Info replied to my question as well: “How bad is the radiation to Pacific marine life?”:
There is lots of debate about this issue with die offs. Much of what has been cited since 2011 had documented problems or previous similar die offs prior to Fukushima. What is the big unknown is that the radiation releases from Daiichi are still very much up for debate. This gives me pause every time I see some declaration that there is no problem of any kind and never will be related to the Pacific. Until we all have a better scientific grasp of the actual releases into the Pacific over time it is impossible to make solid projections. Most of the estimates on Pacific contamination that I have read only used the initial sea releases as their basis. So they do a good job of estimating where contamination might circulate. But if they only account for the initial release and not the additional over time releases, their estimate will be low. The big question is how low. Are they just slightly lower or are they considerably lower? What matters then is what were the actual releases to the sea over time. Right now nobody is doing comprehensive and unbiased research into this, or if they are they haven't published it yet. So there is a knowledge gap. Recently TEPCO admitted to much larger sea releases over time since 2011 than they had previously admitted to [currently 157 billion becquerels per day!]. There were some oceanography experts that had called TEPCO's previous figures into question as their readings were showing there had to be an ongoing release because the readings they were taking were not sufficiently going down over time. So the big question is the difference between these estimates currently being used for Pacific projections and how these new admissions might change those. As far as dispersal. It appears to be a little of both based on the published studies and what oceanographers seem to be most interested in monitoring. It will dilute to an extent, but it will also follow currents and there is some research that found concentrations higher in certain levels of the sea depths. There is also the known issue of cesium concentrating in the sea floor. Much of the research has focused on cesium but from the new TEPCO findings strontium 90 is an equal or larger concern and it isn't being monitored or tested for in the sea the way cesium is (personal email communication, August 27, 2014). Animal Die-Offs Worldwide

In 2013, yachtsman “Ivan MacFadyen says he was shocked by absence of sea life during his 37,000km voyage between Australia and Japan” and described the Pacific Ocean as “dead” due to “severe overfishing.” He reported that the ocean was strewn with “copious amounts of rubbish” and that “[i]t started to strike me the closer we got to Japan” the deader the ocean became (27).

There are multiple causes to the destruction of the flora and fauna of the planet including pollution (from rubbish to radiation), habitat destruction, poaching/over harvesting of species for human consumption and even geophysical disruptions that are now taking their toll on marine habitats.

Whether or not you share the eschatological position of the website, End Times Prophecy, I was amazed to come across this list of animal die-offs at their page, “Mass Animal Deaths for 2014.” It is truly horrifying and appears to be entirely verifiably, factual information (28). We do have to consider that throughout Earth history there have been population explosions followed by die-offs, and that in the past, before the Internet, many of these occurrences were not so readily documented for public viewing. Still, there seems to be a pronounced and disturbing pattern here that is not just a random collection of information.

Meanwhile Japanese Are Still Eating Fish

It is hard to detect the severity of this state-change to the natural world when viewing the complacency and normality of daily affairs in Japan. Sushi restaurants all over Tokyo are packed with customers as if nothing ever happened. Most people, although against nuclear power now, are apolitical and apathetic and will do pretty much whatever the government lays out for them (hey sheep the abattoir is over there!). This is evident as the economy stagnates, the nuclear issue remains unresolved and yet Prime Minister Abe keeps pushing to increase Japan's military and nuclear capabilities.

Understandably the farmers in Fukushima are suffering due to the disaster which had nothing to do with them in the first place. Someone else's mistake (Tepco's) has cost them their livelihoods. In reality, Fukushima prefecture is quite large and I would guess the other side of the region does not have that much radiation, but because the name “Fukushima” is affixed to a food product many people will avoid buying it for fear of radiation.

That said, one wonders about the wisdom of campaigning the rest of the country to gobble down Fukushima's delicious produce. Seafood will have to be monitored for a long time, if not forever (29). And yet one 5 star hotel in Japan is trying to support Fukushima by serving its food on their menu (30). However, Japan is having a hard time getting other Asian countries such as Hong Kong to accept their exported food (31).

I live in Tokyo and personally avoid buying any produce from the northeast or Tokyo regions, although sometimes it is unavoidable. The radiation from Fukushima's nuclear explosions spread hot particles and all assortment of radionuclides across Japan, North America and even the entire world. No one is safe.

Copyright Richard Wilcox 2014 Going Green Before We Go Dead

All of this mess could have been avoided. As the world's leading renewable energy expert, Amory Lovins has shown, renewables such as solar and wind could offset the need for nuclear and fossil fuel based energy sources for many countries including Europe, the US and Japan. Probably for the entire world.

Even the bastion of capitalist ideology, perhaps following the lead of investors like Warren Buffett, Forbes magazine, is promoting wind power over nuclear as having greater scalability, meaning that wind power versus nuclear has “the ability of a system, network, or process to handle a growing amount of work in a capable manner or its ability to be enlarged to accommodate that growth” (36). If there is anything capitalists love it is growth of their assets so maybe they are waking up to saner options.

Fukushima And Dispossession

Finally, please keep an eye out for the upcoming book on Fukushima entitled: Fukushima: Dispossession or Denuclearization (2014). It should be published within the next month or so and is an anthology of articles by a wide variety of independent-minded journalists and scholars of unique talent written in order bring into sharper focus the implications of the Fukushima nuclear disaster. Some of the proceeds from the book will be donated to help children refugees who are still suffering in temporary housing situations in the Fukushima area.

Copyright Richard Wilcox 2014
Richard Wilcox is a Tokyo-based teacher and writer who holds a Ph.D. in environmental studies and is a regular contributor to the world's leading website exposing the Fukushima nuclear disaster, Rense.com. He is also a contributor to Activist Post. His radio interviews and articles are archived at http://wilcoxrb99.wordpress.com and he can be reached by email for radio or internet podcast interviews to discuss the Fukushima crisis at wilcoxrb2013@gmail.com.


1. Alexander Smith, “I cannot deem why men toil so for fame”

2. Major science meeting on Fukushima’s link to wildlife problems on West Coast http://enenews.com/major-gathering-of-scientists-exam-relationship-between-fukushima-and-problems-with-wildlife-off-us-west-coast-looking-at-how-to-best-assess-impact-of-on-pacific-human-health-experts-reevaluat

3. How The Hard Science PhDs Have Wrecked The World

4. LDP looks to crack down on public demonstrations near Diet, hate speech

5. Japan’s secrets bill turns journalists into terrorists

6. Abe’s second strike against freedoms

7. Fukushima Daiichi Sea Releases Updated To 157 Billion Bq Per Day

8. Fukushima released up to 181 Quadrillion Bq of cesium

9. Muon Detection Tests Begin

10. Millisievert Conversion Chart

11. Looking Inside Fukushima Daiichi

12. We've Opened The Gates Of Hell

13. Timothy A. Mousseau: "Fukushima Catastrophe and its Effects on Wildlife" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IcTGUMwVtU

14. Pump and pray: Tepco might have to pour water on Fukushima wreckage forever


16. Thyroid cancer diagnosed in 104 young people in Fukushima

17. Zealots of the Atom: The Nuclear Cult

18. Wikileaks: Ban Ki-Moon Worked with Israel to Undermine UN Report

19. Childhood Leukemias Near Nuclear Power Stations

20. More Fukushima Children Found With Thyroid Cancer

21. Dana Durnford & Terry Daniels - Proof Radiation Is KILLING The Pacific

22. Mass Die-Off of West Coast Sealife: Fukushima Radiation … Or Something Else? http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/12/fukushima-radiation-something-else-causing-mass-die-wildlife-pacific-ocean.html

23. Is the sea floor littered with dead animals due to radiation? No.

24. Hiatus in global warming is due to Atlantic currents, study says, but will end in 2030

25. Global Climate Change: A Definitive Essay On The Primary Causes Of Global Warming

26. Animal Anomalies: Is the Fukushima Daiichi Disaster a 'Tipping Point'?

27. Yachtsman describes horror at ‘dead’, rubbish strewn Pacific Ocean

28. Mass Animal Deaths for 2014

29. Pacific seafood must be monitored for radiation, forever

30. 5 star hotel Grand Hyatt Fukuoka supports Fukushima by eating http://fukushima-diary.com/2014/08/5-star-hotel-grand-hyatt-fukuoka-supports-fukushima-eating/

31. Hong Kong rejects request to lift restriction on Japanese food imports http://fukushima-diary.com/2014/08/government-hong-kong-rejected-japanese-request-lift-restriction-japanese-imports/

32. Lovins, A. (2014, June 28). How Opposite Energy Policies Turned The Fukushima Disaster Into A Loss For Japan And A Win For Germany, Forbes, Retrieved from: http://www.forbes.com/sites/amorylovins/2014/06/28/how-opposite-energy-policies-turned-the-fukushima-disaster-into-a-loss-for-japan-and-a-win-for-germany/

33. The storage necessity myth: how to choreograph high-renewables electricity systems https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsgrahFln0s

34.We Don’t Need a Huge Breakthrough to Make Renewable Energy Viable—It Already Is http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/we-dont-need-huge-breakthrough-make-renewable-energy-viable-it-already-180952254/?no-ist

35. Which Is More Scalable, Nuclear Energy Or Wind Energy?http://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2014/08/22/which-is-more-scalable-nuclear-energy-or-wind-energy/

36. Scalability http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scalability

Will the Ferguson Shooting Mark a Historic Shift in the Police State?

Activist Post -

Bernie Suarez
Activist Post

Only time will tell, but is it too soon to guess whether the Ferguson, Missouri shooting of unarmed teenager Michael Brown will mark a turning point in our march toward tyranny in America? There are signs that this could be the case. Yes this could be an overly optimistic assumption about the current direction of the police state in America, but there is a slight chance that the consciousness that came with the Ferguson shooting may have been a badly needed cure to the metastasizing police state problem.

Before anyone makes assumptions of how naive I'm being or overly optimistic, let's clarify. We are in a battle of competing paradigms and competing consciousness. One important thing to note about the police state is that authority, control, intimidation and police state madness is itself a real-time live form of consciousness. In this police state consciousness we can confirm the typical officer becomes consumed in their role. This disconnected behavior had been confirmed in previous psychology experiments, and we know how governments carefully train police to do as they are told. Add to that, the influence of the culture of police and what we see is a group of people acting within their own (twisted) consciousness to oppress others without consequences. We saw this in Nazi Germany and many other examples throughout history.

This powerful competing consciousness, the police consciousness, took a step back after the Ferguson shooting. How do we know?

Some indicators are alternative and social media's coverage of the images and sounds of the Ferguson police state brutality on American protesters. This mass media coverage of the police state forced mainstream media to pay attention to the police state brutality. Together, this brought an even greater mass awareness of police brutality in America that the control system wasn't prepared for. The result?

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); a.  In San Antonio police launched a new program called 'I Pledge to do the Right Thing' campaign. b. In Ferguson a cop was actually suspended for illegally pointing a rifle at innocent protesters and threatening to kill one.  c. In Davis, California the city council just ordered police to get rid of their military MRAP vehicle given to them for free by the federal government. d. St. Louis police officer (and Glendale police officer) suspended for violent hate talk. e. The (same) cop who threatened to kill a reporter in Ferguson officially resigns. f. Some police are speaking out. It is now revealed that the Pentagon forced military gear on local police departmentsDoes this mean that the police state problem is finally being addressed? Some optimists may see it this way, but it is far too soon to celebrate any long-term victories. At least this shows that the media is willing to give attention to this issue, and that officers and police departments nationwide have been served with a dose of consciousness. This consciousness of deliberately spewing hate needs to be exposed; and this idea that police have the right to do whatever they want has to be contained - perhaps the Ferguson shooting has contributed to this.

On the optimistic side of things it is possible that this attention brought to the violent out-of-control police state could be a starting point to limiting the equipment the local police receive from federal government. Yes, the Obama administration has stated concerns about this issue but this is inconsistent with what we know about federal government's role in all of this. Perhaps this incident, however, will eventually force local communities to end their participation in the controversial 1033 program enacted in 1994 which made it possible for the Pentagon to dump military equipment on local police nationwide.

Perhaps we are finally reaching the initial point of critical reasoning that will allow us to debunk the argument that police need military gear to be "safe". On the pessimistic side of things, however, perhaps these events will be used to engineer a new justification for brutal police force and militarization down the road. That is, perhaps we are being set up for a new series of false flags which will be designed to once again justify why police need military equipment. Perhaps they will stage a massacre involving police deaths (note to police!) and then make the argument that if they had access to military equipment none of this would have happened. Unfortunately, all victories must be taken with a grain of salt.

For now, we can't live in a world overly-anticipating the new world order's next move. We have to take our lessons from the real-time events and find ways of improving our experience. Those of us alive today have the power to use the Michael Brown murder in a positive way and take note of the things that went wrong.

Let's remember Jake Tapper and CNN staging scaremongering political signs behind the crowd to twist Ferguson into ISIS scaring and warmongering. Let's remember the mainstream media desperately trying to spin the shooting into a race issue. Let's remember the psycho cop who threatened reporters with death if they didn't listen to him. Let's note the staged violence and the militarized presence of police treating peaceful American protesters as terrorists. Let us remember the images and sounds of a gun firing eleven times in a matter of seconds on an unarmed teenager. Let us remember the dead body thrown into an SUV as if it were a dead dog or road kill.

Everyone has their own memory of this incredible event as this event does carry the potential to be a game changer in the police state madness that has gripped the United States since the Occupy revolution of 2011. We all saw how the U.C. Davis officer who sprayed innocent peaceful student activists with pepper spray was demonized then later financially rewarded. Let us not allow these corrupt cops to be rewarded again.

We all know that the shooter, officer Darren Wilson, has been unusually quiet, out of sight and given protection by his police constituents from the general public and media. We know that he has been preparing his defense using mystery voices and sporadic spot supporters all spinning the narrative into one that paints Wilson as the victim instead of the aggressor. Let us not allow this narrative to open the door to injustice. Wilson supporters would sell you a narrative and philosophy that states that if Wilson felt in any danger or felt attacked, then he has the right to empty out his gun on an unarmed teenager. That is not what policing is all about. That is not what living in America is all about. Officers are equipped with radios, cameras, batons, tasers and mace to record, disable and potentially capture someone they want to question. Shooting someone to death execution style with eleven shots, six of which actually landed on the body is an execution any way you look at it, not a defensive action.

Hopefully the police defense argument, which holds the power to potentially divide America further, will be allowed to prove its case soundly. Hopefully, this story will culminate with reasonable justice based on the facts. Either way, we can expect the control system and its eager mainstream media mouthpiece to use the final verdict to create division amongst Americans. This should remind us that the end game is to destroy America, kill freedom, strengthen the police state and bring tyranny to America.

Let us use the circumstances we have now to turn this police state agenda in a different direction. This story has proven that we-the-people and the alternative media have the power to do just this. We have the power to share information and expose the new world order and its corrupt police state. Let us keep doing what we are doing and hope for the best. With events happening so fast, let us appreciate and focus on the bigger picture. As these events happen, practice thinking on your own.

We saw a lot of independent thinking in Ferguson and that was one of the great things. We saw and heard from people who are sick and tired of the police state brutality and the mainstream media coverage of it. Let's keep this theme moving forward, for in this type of thinking is how we will find the answers and the solutions that we are looking for. Like the Bundy Ranch confrontation involving patriots willing to die for freedom and the Constitution, the Ferguson shooting ("hands up don't shoot") confrontation showed the power that peaceful demonstrations can have on the psyche of the police state.

In the end, hopefully the Ferguson shooting will be talked about years from now as a key point in the awareness of the police state; and hopefully the path that it leads to will be one that many of us will be proud to look back on.

Bernie Suarez is an activist, critical thinker, radio host, musician, M.D, Veteran, lover of freedom and the Constitution, and creator of the Truth and Art TV project. He also has a background in psychology and highly recommends that everyone watch a documentary titled The Century of the Self. Bernie has concluded that the way to defeat the New World Order is to truly be the change that you want to see. Manifesting the solution and putting truth into action is the very thing that will defeat the globalists.

The Key Factors in a Sustainable Gold Standard for Money

Activist Post -

David Redick
Activist Post


I have been keenly interested in the nature of money since 2009 and have read many books and articles about it, and have heard discussions from forums and conferences. I have studied its origins and changes. This revealed the broad array of different plans for monetary systems as to who creates and controls it, and the role of commodities such as gold. In this article I will review basic issues and comment on some of the recently proposed plans. I use the word ‘Sustainable’ in the title because ALL money in the past has eventually been abused and ruined by greedy and desperate politicians and bankers. Of course, this applies to today’s failing US Dollar (USD) which has lost over 95% of its value (purchasing power) since the Federal Reserve System was founded in 1913.

Money is just a step up from the cumbersome ‘barter’ method. It serves as an in-between ‘third party’ called a ‘medium of exchange’ that can then be used to buy from others, or kept as a store of value (savings). Money also serves as a ‘unit of account’ (weight of the commodity it is made of, or a ‘name’, such as ‘dollar’, representing a weight) for pricing and accounting.

Money is a product of users (buyers and sellers) in the marketplace, and the government need not (indeed should not) be involved, except to perform its proper function of protecting citizens from fraud and theft. Governments should not be allowed to choose the type of money, create it, or ‘manage’ the system because history shows that 99% of them abuse the monetary system to pay for their projects (mostly war, welfare and corruption).

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Central Banks

For the same reasons as above, there should be no central bank which has special privileges to create and lend money, set interest rates, ‘manage the economy’, etc. Ours is the ‘Federal Reserve System’ (the ‘Fed’), which is a private firm controlled by the federal government. All major nations have one and they are all created by and for politicians and bankers to be sure they never run out of money. Ours and the others all do far more harm than good and should be abolished and replaced by private mints (Sec. 4 below). Many books and papers written by esteemed academics and think-tank scholars fall short of using weight of gold as the unit of account, and hold on to some functions of the Fed and government (just do a tune-up). It seems that self-serving peer-pressure and habits prevail!

Types of Money

Various materials of value (shells, hoes, tobacco) have been used as money, and all served the need for a medium of exchange, unit of account, and a store and measure of value, but gold always emerges as best, as described in Table 1 below.

A. Coins: Coins can be of two types;

1. ‘Commodity’, where they are partly or wholly made of a commodity such as gold or silver. Various coin values would have different amounts. For example, a small, round, gold disc could be forged into a hole in the center of a coin. This would allow testing to assure its purity and weight. The balance of the coin would be hard base metal or alloy, with the weight of precious metal the coin contains marked on it, or

2. ‘Representative’ (or ‘Token’), where they are made of base metals such as copper, aluminum, zinc, nickel, steel, and alloys thereof, and are marked as redeemable to a certain weight and purity of a commodity such as gold or silver. These are useful for lower value transactions.

Characteristics of good commodity coins

To achieve broad use, commodity coins must be made of, or contain, a material that has these ten characteristics:
  1. Rare, with a low amount in existence now, and limited new supply,
  2. Malleable; can be pressed/stamped into coins,  
  3. Stable physically and chemically; doesn't break, rust, or rot; can be stored; lasts through much handling, 
  4. Easy to identify, and determine purity and weight, 
  5. Difficult or impossible to counterfeit, 
  6. Homogeneous; a piece is the same throughout, 
  7. Divisible into pieces; diamonds and pearls aren’t, 
  8. High value per ounce; not bulky to handle or store, 
  9. Acceptable to most Sellers; familiar and salable.
  10. Has market value when not used as money (thus is; a) equal in value to the good or service in a transaction, and b) a store and measure of value.)
The ‘market’ (users of money) has decided that gold fits these requirements best, but silver and copper can have a role in parallel, with no fixed ratios set as to value per gram (i.e., no bi-metallic standard). The coins must be valued and marked by weight of their precious metal content (such as ‘milligrams’), or the amount they can be redeemed for. It is interesting to note that gold is not ‘consumed’ as other commodities, including silver and copper, are. Thus except for wear, over 90% of all gold mined in history still exists (even if buried in a tomb).

The term ‘sound money’ is often used to denote; 1) It is made of a material that has market value, even when not used as money, and 2) Is not just ‘fiat’, where the value of base-metal (not ‘precious’) coins or paper notes (such as the USD since ending gold redemption in 1971) is decreed (and enforced by legal tender laws) by the issuing government.

B. Paper Notes: Notes can be used as a convenience (compared to carrying or storing tiny or large pieces of gold), but must be redeemable, by the issuing mint or dealer, to any bearer on demand. Notes are not ‘money’, -linked, -backed, or -based on or to gold, but just a claim check to redeem for money (gold, etc.).


Private mints should be allowed to create all of the above forms of money, without a government license. As with any product, users in a free market will determine which is most popular. Competition works! The only law would be that mints must publish the percent of gold reserves they have for redemption of paper notes, but with no required percentage. The government, or private security firms, would perform ‘surprise‘ audits at least twice a year. I say surprise, so unscrupulous mints could not borrow gold just to improve their results in a scheduled audit.

Price of Gold

Gold has no price (in USD, etc.) when it is used as money, because it IS money, valued by weight and fineness. It only has an exchange rate with other money. Example; what is the price of a US Dollar (USD)? Gold’s value (purchasing power) varies by the rules of supply and demand, as with any commodity. This is a key error in plans where the goal is to manage a fixed price (in USD) of gold, such as in the May-2014 Forbes-Ames book Money.

My views are consistent with those presented by esteemed Prof. Joseph T. Salerno (pace.edu) in his two articles;

1) ‘A Substandard Golden Rule’, published in the ‘Mises Daily’ on May 29, 2013 (http://mises.org/daily/6442/A-Substandard-Golden-Rule). Salerno says;
The gold “price rule” denotes the monetary reform proposal put forth in various forms by a number of supply-siders, including Arthur Laffer, Robert Mundell, and Jude Wanniski. Laffer’s detailed formulation of the proposal also served as the basis of the Gold Reserve bill, introduced in the Senate by Jesse Helms in January 1981. The scheme has reared its head once again in H.R. 1576, the “Dollar Bill Act of 2013,” introduced by Congressman Ted Poe (poe.house.gov; R-TX-2) on April 16, 2013, and strongly supported by Steve Forbes.(Redick note; It was never passed by the House Financial Services Committee), and 2) ‘The Myth of the Unchanging Value of Gold, published in the ‘Mises Daily’ on Aug. 29, 2014
(http://mises.org/daily/6858/The-Myth-of-the-Unchanging-Value-of-Gold}: He ends with this;
Proponents of gold-price targeting thus seem to ignore both theory and history in assuming that once the dollar price of gold has been fixed, the value of money itself becomes forever stable and immune to the influence of market forces of supply and demand. Inflation and deflation are, therefore, ipso facto banished from the economy. This implies that any changes occurring in the quantity of money under a fixed-gold price regime are to be construed as benign and stabilizing adjustments of the supply of money to changes in the demand for money. Steve Forbes writes: “The fact that a foot has 12 inches doesn’t restrict the number of square feet you have in a house. The fact that a pound has 16 ounces doesn’t restrict your weight, alas — it’s a simple measurement. ... The virtue of a properly constructed gold standard is that it’s both stable and flexible—stable in value and flexible in meeting the marketplace’s natural need for money. If an economy is growing rapidly such a gold-based system would allow for rapid expansion of the money supply. In other words Forbes’s “stable and flexible” gold standard would facilitate and camouflage an inflationary expansion of the money supply that would, according to Austrians, distort capital markets and lead to asset bubbles. The motto of our current gold-price fixers seems to be: “We want sound money — and plenty of it.” Bravo for Prof. Salerno!

Again, I say the USD should be abolished, and use ‘weight of gold’ as the unit of account. Congress would include a conversion program from the USD to gold in a yet to be written ‘Monetary Act of 2015’. My plan is shown in Chapter 4 of my book Monetary Revolution USA, available on Amazon.com.

As with any commodity, gold value varies with market demand, even when used as money. When demand increases in a market area (region, nation) gold will APPRECIATE in value and cause price deflation (reduced prices; by weight). This is GOOD! It encourages saving and increases the standard of living. It is more important for money to retain value (purchasing power) than to stay the same. Gold money will flow between regions to seek equilibrium (but differences are OK). We have lived with inflation since the Fed started increasing the money supply in 1913 (to pay for WW1, then feed the ‘Roaring 20s’). Yes, sellers will need to adjust prices (and some contracts and insurance), but this is minor compared to the ravages of our present ‘monetary inflation’ (increasing the money supply, which causes ‘price inflation’


If my ideas sound good to you, contact your Representative or Senator in Congress to urge them to start or sponsor the ‘Monetary Act of 2015’ based on my ideas.

Thanks, and good luck as the USD falls in value! See investment ideas in my How to Protect and Grow Your Wealth book.

All of the above issues (and more) are covered in my book Monetary Revolution USA, and How to Protect and Grow Your Wealth, the text of which is posted (as a public service) at part 2 in the left margin of my ‘better government’ site www.Forward-USA.org, and on Amazon.com. See more articles about money in part 8, and my bio at part 6. Also visit my ‘business’ site at SaferInvesting.org.

By: David Redick (BS-Eng., MBA-Economics) is an activist for peace and prosperity via better (usually less) government, and free markets. Send comments to redickd@aol.com. Read more at his web sites www.Forward-USA.org and SaferInvesting.org, and his five books listed on Amazon.com.

Why Does ISIS Fit In So Perfectly With The PNAC Plan?

Activist Post -

Bernie Suarez
Activist Post

Here are some simple burning questions whose answers can only be described by the globalist plans for a new world order. These questions strike at the root of the question all of humanity is asking: Who is ISIS?

1. Where do they bank? Or do they have a money tree?

2. Where do they get their guns from? Bullets? Knives?

3. Where do they eat, how do they get their food?

4. Where do they sleep, where do they get toiletries?

5. Where is their military base? They DO stick together right?

6. Since we know where they are why can't they simply be rounded up in a way that doesn't involve any nation attacks? But wait ...

7. Who is their leader and how did he learn to outsmart the world's greatest military and outperform all generals in U.S. history?

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); 8. How does ISIS avoid NSA surveillance?

9. How do they communicate and avoid all communication systems at the same time?

10. How do they avoid military and government satellite surveillance and tracking?

11. How does the mainstream media and all the CIA pundits on TV like Colonel Anthony Shaffer know so much about how dangerous ISIS is yet they know nothing else like where they got their weapons from or how they were created? Oh wait, how did Shaffer obtain his knowledge about them? Who specifically did he speak to?

12. Why is the (CIA) chain of command that ISIS responds to not reported by mainstream media?

13. When did the first ISIS meeting take place and why?

14. Why is the simple facts about the creation of ISIS so clear and documented in the alternative and worldwide media except in the tiny circle of Zionist companies that control Western media?

Here are a few more burning direct questions that all of humanity is really asking.

15. Why does everything ISIS does fit in so perfectly with the Bush Neocon Project For A New American Century? - Why does it fit in so perfectly with the globalist new world order plans like a perfect fitting shoe or glove??

16. Should this wide disconnect about the reporting of who ISIS is and how they were created and funded be the last straw for mainstream media?

17. Can the world afford to live in the Western mainstream media paradigm anymore?

As we contemplate these questions let us remember that the mainstream media in America is controlled by only 6 companies and all of them are on the same page when it comes to Israel, the global government agenda, the U.S./U.N. led new world order plans, the Project for a New American Century, the wishes of the Council on Foreign Relations and all CIA (Mossad) backed operations. It's all part of the same story and the same paradigm.

So while the mainstream media continues to lie and spin stories designed to make you think that ISIS is a mysterious and dangerous gang whose defeating can only occur with more bombing of Iraq and illegal invasion of Syria, don't forget that no "army" exists to make headline news that challenges massive empires without massive support. There are no trees that grow guns, bullets and other weapons, they must be supplied by someone. The same can be said about all resources including money, food, shelter, water and other basic needs of life. Everyone who works for a living and anyone who is struggling or has struggled financially to survive can appreciate this.

Let us not be fooled by artificially engineered Western media narratives that not only fit in perfectly with the globalists stated goals of taking over the Middle East clearly outlined in the Project For A New American Century paper titled Rebuilding America's Defenses. From a common sense point of view, it isn't very difficult to see how the ongoing mainstream media narratives about ISIS no longer makes any financial or practical sense from a day-to-day/daily-living point of view.

Bernie Suarez is an activist, critical thinker, radio host, musician, M.D, Veteran, lover of freedom and the Constitution, and creator of the Truth and Art TV project. He also has a background in psychology and highly recommends that everyone watch a documentary titled The Century of the Self. Bernie has concluded that the way to defeat the New World Order is to truly be the change that you want to see. Manifesting the solution and putting truth into action is the very thing that will defeat the globalists.

Corporations Join Droves Renouncing US Citizenship

Activist Post -

(And now those "droves" are going to be paying an extra 422% to break free by renouncing citizenship, according to Forbes. - Ed.)

Click image to enlargeNick Giambruno, International Man
Casey Research

Don’t be surprised to lose if you don’t make an effort at being competitive.

And if you go out of your way to make yourself less competitive, expect to lose.

If that sounds like simple common sense, that’s because it is.

But it’s also exactly what the US has been doing for years—enacting tax policies that sabotage its global economic competitiveness.

It’s like trying to get in shape for a marathon by going on an all-McDonald’s diet. (Speaking of McDonalds, check out this funny video spoof of what their commercials should really look like.)

Here are two major reasons why the US is lagging in the global economic marathon:
  1. The US has the highest effective corporate income tax rate in the developed world (see chart above).
  1. Unlike most other countries, which only tax domestic profits, the US taxes the earnings of foreign subsidiaries of US companies when the money is transferred back to the US. This has had the effect of US corporations keeping over $1.9 trillion in retained earnings offshore to avoid the crippling US corporate income tax.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); These “worst in the developed world” tax policies are clearly hurting the global competitiveness of American companies.

Being deemed a “US Person” for tax purposes is like trying to swim with a lifejacket made of lead.
It should come as no surprise that an increasing number of productive people and companies are seeking to shed this burden so they can keep their heads above water.

At this point, it’s more than just a trickle—it’s an established trend in motion.

And I don’t see anything that would reverse it. On the contrary, given the political dynamics—ramped-up spending on welfare and warfare policies, as well as an “eat the rich” mood—taxes have nowhere to go but north. And that means the exodus will continue.

Three Cheers for Walgreens  Over the past couple of years, dozens of high-profile US companies have moved abroad (or seriously considered it) to lower their corporate income tax rate and to access their offshore retained earnings without triggering US taxes. Among them are Medtronic, Liberty Global, Sara Lee, and Omnicom Group—the largest US advertising firm—to just name a few. Earlier this year Pfizer, one of the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies, sought (but was ultimately rebuffed) to move abroad, which would have cut its tax bills by as much as $1 billion a year. The strategy these companies are using is known as an inversion. It’s where a US company merges with a foreign company in a jurisdiction with lower taxes and then reincorporates there. Current US law allows for this if the foreign shareholders own at least 20% of the combined company (though some are trying to raise the minimum to 50%). Now, despite the howls and shrieks from upset politicians and the mainstream media about these companies being “unpatriotic” and “un-American,” they’re doing absolutely nothing illegal. Inversions are totally acceptable within the current rules of the US Tax Code. Chuck Grassley, a Republican senator from Iowa has said, “These expatriations aren’t illegal. But they’re sure immoral.” I beg to differ. Why would anyone want to give the destructive bureaucrats in DC a penny more than is legally required? As far as I’m concerned, not only is there nothing wrong with going where you’re treated best, there's also an ethical and moral imperative to starve the Beast. And now the latest high-profile company to consider putting the Beast on a diet is Walgreens. Walgreens is considering reincorporating in Switzerland as part of a merger with Alliance Boots, a European rival. The net effect for would be to reduce Walgreens’ tax rate to 20%, down from around 31% now. The move is estimated to save around $4 billion over the next five years. What really has the politicians scared is that inversions have started to snowball. The New York Times quoted an international tax lawyer stating that “it takes one company with enough public recognition to start [a] domino effect.” Walgreens could be the company that triggers a domino effect. If Walgreens were to move, it would gain a significant competitive advantage against its rivals. CVS, Walgreens’ main competitor, paid a 34% tax rate in recent years. Can CVS really compete with Walgreens if the latter is paying 20%? Probably not. And that will only lead to more inversions.

Another Way to Starve the Beast
  Remember, US companies are not globally competitive because of these two unique burdens:
  1. The US has the highest effective corporate tax rate in the developed world.
  1. Unlike most countries, which only tax domestic profits, the US taxes the earnings of foreign subsidiaries of US companies when the money is transferred back to the US.
We have already seen how inversions can reduce #1, but they also offer huge benefits in terms of #2.
Reincorporating abroad allows companies to permanently avoid paying US taxes on foreign earnings. It also allows companies to access their retained earnings offshore in ways they couldn’t before without triggering punishing US taxes. Medtronic, for example, has accumulated $20.5 billion of untaxed earnings in foreign subsidiaries. By reincorporating abroad, Medtronic can access that money without getting slapped with US corporate income taxes, which would save it billions. For companies like Medtronic and Walgreens, reincorporating abroad seems like a no-brainer. Contrary to the government propaganda, the villains in this story aren’t the companies seeking to diversify abroad to remain globally competitive. The villains are clearly the spendthrift politicians who enact these “worst in the developed world” tax policies, which create very compelling incentives for these companies to leave the US.

It’s Not Just Companies Saying Sayonara
  While the US should be enacting policies that make it attractive for productive people and companies to come to the US—rather than driving them away—don’t hold your breath for positive change. It’s more likely that nothing but more taxes and regulations are coming. 
But as we have seen with companies like Medtronic and Walgreens, companies have options too.
And it’s not just multibillion-dollar corporate entities that have options. Individuals operating on a modest scale can also reap enormous benefits by diluting the amount of control the bureaucrats in DC (or any country) wield over them. International diversification is the solution.

You do this by moving some of your savings abroad with offshore bank and brokerage accounts, physical gold held abroad, owning foreign real estate, and establishing an offshore company or trust.
Obtaining a second passport is an important part of the mix as well.

You probably can’t take all of these steps, and that’s fine. Even taking just one will go a long way to reducing your political risk and giving you more options. In many cases, you don’t even have to leave your living room.

Think of it as your own personal insurance policy against an out-of-control government.

However, things can change quickly. New options emerge, while others disappear. This is why it’s so important to have the most up-to-date and accurate information possible when formulating your international diversification strategy. That’s where International Man comes in.

To keep up with the best strategies, you might want to check out our Going Global publication, where they are discussed in great actionable detail.

Is St. Petersburg the Venue for a Western Sponsored Color Revolution in Russia?

Activist Post -

Steven MacMillan
Activist Post

The announcement by Barack Obama on July 31st to appoint John F. Tefft as the new U.S. ambassador to Russia is a warning to the Russian government of the intentions of Western foreign policy planners. Tefft, who has worked for the State Department and the National War College in Washington, is an expert at planning color revolutions to overthrow regimes targeted by the Western elite. He is the former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine where he was a key architect in preparing the Washington orchestrated coup in Kiev.

Color revolutions are based upon a fusion of the Rand Corporations “swarming” technique invented in the 1960s and Professor Gene Sharp’s guide to nonviolent struggle in the 1990s.

Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) act as an extension of Western intelligence agencies to create artificial revolutionary movements in countries that oppose Anglo-American hegemony through the use of social networks and text messaging, resulting in the overthrow of unfavorable regimes. They always appear as organic demonstrations by a people against a corrupt ruling class, which is reinforced and sometimes manufactured by the mainstream corporate media, but in reality they are organized by foreign NGOs – like in the case of the Centre for Applied Nonviolent Actions and Strategies (CANVAS), a U.S supported Serbian based “revolution consultancy” group, which was operating in Ukraine during 2013-14. The 2000 coup in Serbia, the 2003 Rose Revolution in Georgia and the 2004 Orange Revolution in Ukraine are some of the most notorious coups where this technique has been used.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); The most experienced NGO that has been involved in the majority of the color revolutions over the past two decades is the ubiquitous National Endowment for Democracy (NED), whose “funding is dependent on the continued support of the White House and Congress”. The historian Allen Weinstein, who helped draft the legislation in the 1980s creating NED, remarked during an interview with the Washington Post in 1991: “A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA”. Carl Gershman, the President of NED, wrote in an op-ed for the Washington Post in September 2013 that: “Ukraine is the biggest prize”, a few months before his organization was heavily involved in orchestrating protests in Kiev.

Along with fellow regime changing organizations such as George Soros’s Open Society Foundation (OSF) and U.S. Agency for International Development (U.S. AID), NED controls proxy organizations across the globe. One Russian based organization is the‘Freedom of Information Foundation’ (FIF), which was founded by Ivan Pavlov and is based in St. Petersburg, whose chief supporters are NED, OSF and U.S. Aid. On 19th August, the Russian government expelled the wife of Pavlov due to Russian allegations of her promoting the “overthrow of the constitutional order”. Putin himself has acknowledged the threat to Russian security presented by western NGOs in a speech to the Federal Security Service (FSB) in April, asserting than many NGOs serve “foreign national interests”. USAID was also expelled from Russia in 2012 due to what the Russian foreign ministry said were “attempts to influence political processes through its grants”.

Relations between Russia and the West are at their most strained since the height of the Cold War, with the Russian President coming under relentless attack by U.S. and EU politicians over Ukraine – Hilary Clinton went as far as to compare Putin to Hitler. It is clear that the Western elite are determined to overthrow Putin in Moscow, and replace him with a more subservient, pliant and less nationalist leader who will be more willing to bow to the dictates of Washington, London and Brussels.

Putin’s Russia provides a counterweight to Anglo-American hegemony, although he has flirted with the Western elite on occasion. I am no apologist for Putin or the Kremlin, but the West has clearly been the belligerent force on the international stage since the collapse of the Soviet Union. The eastward expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) into former Warsaw Pact countries as part of a wider strategy of encircling Russia is a highly provocative tactic.

In a recent article titled ‘The Dangerous Mr. Putin’, neo-con war hawk and former State Department official David J. Kramer blames Putin for the crisis in Ukraine and he asserts that: “This makes Putin, and now even Russia, a serious threat”. Kramer is the President of Freedom House, an organization which is connected to NED and has been involved in numerous color revolutions across the planet in the past.

A Color Revolution in Russia

There is no doubt that Western strategists have been considering instigating a second color revolution in Russia, after the first attempt to meddle in Russian internal affairs failed in the run up to the 2012 presidential elections. In an article by French intellectual and the founder of Voltaire Network, Thierry Meyssan, he emphasizes the importance of the relationship between Putin and Prime Minister, Dmitry Medvedev, in order to ensure Russia’s stability:
It will be important for President Vladimir Putin to be able to trust his prime minister, Dmitry Medvedev, whom Washington hoped to recruit to overthrow him. Medvedev may be the weak link within the Russian establishment as he was the chair of the Institute of Contemporary Development Board of Trustees in 2008, an organization that is part of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)’s ‘Council of Councils’ program. If Medvedev is still part of this organization it could prove decisive in the coming years, as the CFR is America’s pre-eminent think tank which is filled with State Department and CIA officials.

Meyssan also links to a video by a Russian politician Evgeny Fedorov, titled: There will be a Maidan in St. Petersburg. Fedorov states that St. Petersburg has been targeted by the West as a strategic weak spot in Russia where unrest can be fomented and manufactured, with the Governor elections in September a potential opportunity to trigger protests:
2-3 weeks ago the U.S. ambassador held a closed meeting in one of the theatres in Moscow, where he openly said the first blow will be struck in St. Petersburg during the elections in September. If protests erupt over the next few months or years in Russia, the source of the demonstrations and the nature of the NGOs working in the region will have to be closely investigated considering the history of organizations such as NED.

Steven MacMillan is an independent writer, researcher, geopolitical analyst and editor of The Analyst Report, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”, where this first appeared.

This Simple Mind Trick Puts Stress to Sleep

Activist Post -

Heather Callaghan
Activist Post

As focus and fear turns to the amount of craziness and chaos in the world continuing to explode, it gets harder to stay sane in an insane world - or not get sick trying. Plus, we've all got our own problems to deal with personally.

Simply put, stress is the "gift that keeps giving" until it's unwrapped. In that sense, it's benevolent. I think that's why it stays in what we call the subconscious until it is brought forth. Until your body/mind considers it safe to unwrap. Someone once said, "Hell is the possibility of sanity." In a manner of speaking, it's a good type of hell, because it puts you back as the CEO of your life, despite the outside world's demands for "happy insanity." And it can be as temporary as a minor setback if we're actually allowed to get through it - but, we are compelled early on to avoid it, "be happy," suppress, distract, entertain it away, rationalize, deny, fix it immediately, wrap a bow around it...

This will help you look it square in the eye and evaporate it...

There are also ways that sound healthy to deal with stress and some of them truly are. Some of them only scratch at the surface. This is a technique that reframes the problem. It doesn't necessarily remove the problem, but removes the explosive charge - one that some people keep up for years - and allows clarity to deal. Really deal.
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Maybe you are already empowered by the following - maybe it was instilled in you early on or you figured it out with growing wisdom. Each upcoming generation is given their outlets, it appears, through social engineering. Anger, stress, and frustration turned inward and left unchecked leads to powerlessness and grief.

The mind may logically know when something happened in the past and is over, the body does not. Flight or flight is triggered all the time (often by memories), even when there is no fire, or no bus about to hit you when you step off the curb. When stress from past events is left to brew it wreaks havoc on the immune system, creates constant fight or flight, and drowns a person in inflammation-flaring cortisol hormone. (That's not even the tip of the iceberg) During this time, it's nearly impossible to continue healing and dealing, because everything in the body is now focused on this "emergency." And it is a legitimate emergency for that person, so it's important to especially take care of oneself if it's a personal crisis, and treat it like a flu.

There is talk of stress management all the time - how much and how many times are people intended to rise up to it? No one - at least none of the self-help or new age "gurus" - ever talks of reducing it, do they? Why manage it, there's too much of that going on as it is... It needs to arise or we get discernment conditioned out of us, but the body always knows when it's been hit.

Stress is boiled down to these 3 things:
  1. Something you have (or that happened), that you don't want (didn't/don't want to happen)
  2. Something you want (to happen), that you don't have
  3. Denial - having something (or something that happened) but pretending you don't 
    • ignoring or avoidance add gas to this fire
Here are 4 options:
  1. Change your situation - whatever is in your control to change, if that's what you really want
    • This would be the time figure that out as a way to solve the problem, are you up for the change? If not, that's okay too. It might not be a problem that needs fixing, just something that we don't like
  2. Change how you view it/feel about it - not always feasible, but it's often possible to reframe, deal and move on
  3. Stay miserable, suffering etc - this is an option  
    • Some people either never arrive here or stay stuck here because, they've distracted it away. It helps to know when this option has been chosen
  4. Acceptance, i.e. embrace the "crapstorm" - it's not here to stay
    • This allows anything that needs to surface do so, and leave like the storm
Hope I don't sound too much like Stuart Smalley when I say that none of these are "bad."

I don't believe life can be boiled down to a neat list, but awareness of these stressors/options precludes reactionary behavior and further suffering. It reigns in people's energy and personal power so that they are in control of their lives, and are not unwittingly socially guided or following the expectations of others. It keeps someone from being stuck on one with the added stress of "I shouldn't do/be/feel" whatever.

The problem is a "crapstorm" where stress is the response. The storm is no respecter of persons and for the most part, is outside one's control - "it happens." While it can sometimes be a result of the consequences of choice, there is no moral judgement attached to it. In other words, it's not a punishment or a cashing in of "karma points." And no, you did not attract that fender-bender into your life - believing that robs personal power and actually takes a person out of the driver seat. Attaching sentiments like that can add unnecessary pain. Constant worry or bracing yourself does this too.

Supposedly, asking yourself "is that really so?" when you internalize or "why is it so easy to deal with this and solve the problem?" can command your mind to quietly come up with answers. It doesn't hurt to try.

Do you have anything to add? Feel free to impart your wisdom below!

Heather Callaghan is a natural health blogger and food freedom activist. You can see her work at NaturalBlaze.com and ActivistPost.com. Like at Facebook.

Recent posts by Heather Callaghan:

Subscribe to post.assemblyunionpost.org aggregator