Think of how far Technology has advanced in this last century; one hundred years ago the knapsack parachute was invented, a device that would change the ways wars were fought and made flying a little less dangerous, John Browning finished designing his revolutionary pistol, the Colt M1911, and CRT Television was invented, bravely stepping into a world of projector screens and radios. Those inventions created huge paradigm shifts in the way people could move, could entertain themselves, and kill. In our modern day and age, the vast majority of inventions are catered towards our need to entertain ourselves, many of them beyond the wildest dreams of futurologists. Our tech has expanded to the point were soon we will be able to do some of the things that comic book heroes could never have dreamed of. Remember watching Star-Wars as a kid and seeing Darth Vader get mad over some missing data tapes? The scene looks a whole lot less badass now and way more laughable when you consider that few people even use tapes anymore. Hell, Darth Vader’s suit is in many ways a relic, artificial muscles have been invented and while they haven’t made any arms able to outperform the real deal, they are definitely the kind of prosthetic I’d want. http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2009/03/flexing-carbon-nanotube-muscles.ars Closer to home with our technologies, we find our soldiers outfitted with cameras and gps’s on their helmets and backpacks, their performance monitored and evaluated, their position, as long as these systems last, known at all times. If it were not for the miserly attitude of the Millitary Industrial Complex, we would see this equipment on all American soldiers, and possibly all of their allies soldier’s too. Such technology has positive benefits; the ability to provide soldiers with advanced tactical information plus giving the staff members a better idea for what is going on in the field.
image of a US Army soldier in 2001, outfitted with the then latest technologies for the land warrior project.
Land Warrior as used by a member of he 4th Battalion, 9th Infantry, in Iraq, 2007.
Unfortunately such technology could also be used to paint an unflattering view of the soldiers enemies, or the soldiers themselves. The future it seems, could involve simply ‘tagging’ soldiers with micro or even nano chips and using their biometric data, track their performance and increase their capabilities by responding with the proper kinds of drug or mental therapies. Heck by counteracting the fatigue poisons that build up in the human body, and with injections of cortisol and adrenaline you could potentialy create super soldiers who can run faster, longer and hit harder like steve Rogers, the Original Captain America (albeit with tempers more like wolverine). Unfortunately with all this new technology we have created a new generation of men, no longer do we look to the strong or the brave, but rather, to the capable; who the hell knows how to build a car, or how the components work? How would we work if one or more of our currently placed systems broke down. Who do the incapable turn to, when machines make other machines, the job of people simply to maintain the makers. Is this technology that enables us to know what another is doing, feeling, at any moment all the time a true replacement for the human desire for contact or are we all becoming like superman, all knowing, known by all, and yet anonymous, alone.
The Psychology of Self Esteem is another silent movie by bigbytes. This is a para-phrasing taken from the 1969 book by Nathaniel Brandon by the same name. If you like to read or study psychology and self estemm, I recommend the book.
Satan is going on vacation and needs a replacement – Also featuring Mr Tinkles the Pants Monkey New post Satan is going on vacation and needs a replacement
Journal of the National Cancer Institute,
Vol. 55, No. 3, September 1975, pp.597-602 by A.E. Munson, L.S. Harris, M.A. Friedman, W.L. Dewey, and R.A. Carchman
Summary:
Lewis lung adenocarcinoma growth was ****** by the oral administration of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, delta-8-tetrahydrocannabinol, and cannabinol (CBN), but not cannabidiol (CBD). Animals treated for 10 consecutive days with delta-9-THC, beginning the day after tumor implantation, demonstrated a dose-dependent action of ****** tumor growth. Mice treated for 20 consecutive days with delta-8-THC and CBN had reduced primary tumor size. CBD showed no inhibitory effect on tumor growth at 14, 21, or 28 days. Delta-9-THC, delta-8-THC, and CBN increased the mean survival time (36% at 100 mg/kg, 25% at 200 mg/kg, and 27% at 50 mg/kg;, respectively), whereas CBD did not. Delta-9-THC administered orally daily until death in doses of 50, 100, or 200 mg/kg did not increase the life-spans of (C57BL/6 X DBA/2) F (BDF) mice hosting the L1210 murine leukemia. However, delta-9-THC administered daily for 10 days significantly inhibited Friend leukemia virus-induced splenomegaly by 71% at 200 mg/kg as compared to 90.2% for actinomycin D. Experiments with bone marrow and isolated Lewis lung cells incubated in vitro with delta-8-THC and delta-9-THC showed a dose-dependent (10 -4 10 -7) inhibition (80-20%, respectively) of tritiated thymidine and 14C -uridine uptake into these cells. CBD was active only in high concentrations (10-4). J Natl Cancer Inst 55: 597-602, 1975.
Antineoplastic Activity of Cannabinoids
Investigations into the physiologic processes affected by the psychoactive constitutuents of marihuana [delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (delta-9-THC) and delta-8-tetrahydrocannabinol (delta-8-THC)] purified from Cannabis sativa are extensive (1). However, only recently have attempts been made to elucidate the biochemical basis for their cytotoxic or cytostatic activity. Leuchtenberger et al. (2) demonstrated that human lung cultures exposed to marihuana smoke showed alterations in DNA synthesis, with the appearance of anaphase bridges. Zimmerman and McClean (3), studying macromolecular synthesis in Tetrahymena, indicated that very low concentrations of delta-9-THC inhibited RNA, DNA, and protein synthesis and produced cytolysis. Stenchever et al. (4) showed an increase in the number of damaged or broken chromosomes in chronic users of marihuana. Delta-9-THC administered iv inhibited bone marrow leukopoieses (5), and Kolodny et al. (6) reported that marihuana ;may impair testosterone secretion and spermatogenesis. Furthermore, Nahas et al. (7) showed that in chronic marihuana users there is a decreased lymphocyte reactivity to mitogens as measured by thymidine uptake. These and other (8) observations suggest that marihuana (delta-9-THC) interferes with vital cell biochemical processes, though no definite mechanism has yet been established. A preliminary report from this laboratory (9) indicated that the ability of delta-9-THC to interfere with normal cell functions might prove efficacious against neoplasms. This report represents an effort to test various cannabinoids in several in vivo and in vitro tumor systems to determine the kinds of tumors that are sensitive to these compounds and reveal their possible biochemical sites of action(s).
I appreciate very much your generous invitation to be here tonight.
You bear heavy responsibilities these days and an article I read some time ago reminded me of how particularly heavily the burdens of present day events bear upon your profession.
You may remember that in 1851 the New York Herald Tribune under the sponsorship and publishing of Horace Greeley, employed as its London correspondent an obscure journalist by the name of Karl Marx.
We are told that foreign correspondent Marx, stone broke, and with a family ill and undernourished, constantly appealed to Greeley and managing editor Charles Dana for an increase in his munificent salary of $5 per installment, a salary which he and Engels ungratefully labeled as the “lousiest petty bourgeois cheating.”
But when all his financial appeals were refused, Marx looked around for other means of livelihood and fame, eventually terminating his relationship with the Tribune and devoting his talents full time to the cause that would bequeath to the world the seeds of Leninism, Stalinism, revolution and the cold war.
If only this capitalistic New York newspaper had treated him more kindly; if only Marx had remained a foreign correspondent, history might have been different. And I hope all publishers will bear this lesson in mind the next time they receive a poverty-stricken appeal for a small increase in the expense account from an obscure newspaper man.
I have selected as the title of my remarks tonight “The President and the Press.” Some may suggest that this would be more naturally worded “The President Versus the Press.” But those are not my sentiments tonight.
It is true, however, that when a well-known diplomat from another country demanded recently that our State Department repudiate certain newspaper attacks on his colleague it was unnecessary for us to reply that this Administration was not responsible for the press, for the press had already made it clear that it was not responsible for this Administration.
Nevertheless, my purpose here tonight is not to deliver the usual assault on the so-called one party press. On the contrary, in recent months I have rarely heard any complaints about political bias in the press except from a few Republicans. Nor is it my purpose tonight to discuss or defend the televising of Presidential press conferences. I think it is highly beneficial to have some 20,000,000 Americans regularly sit in on these conferences to observe, if I may say so, the incisive, the intelligent and the courteous qualities displayed by your Washington correspondents.
Nor, finally, are these remarks intended to examine the proper degree of privacy which the press should allow to any President and his family.
If in the last few months your White House reporters and photographers have been attending church services with regularity, that has surely done them no harm.
On the other hand, I realize that your staff and wire service photographers may be complaining that they do not enjoy the same green privileges at the local golf courses which they once did.
It is true that my predecessor did not object as I do to pictures of one’s golfing skill in action. But neither on the other hand did he ever bean a Secret Service man.
My topic tonight is a more sober one of concern to publishers as well as editors.
I want to talk about our common responsibilities in the face of a common danger. The events of recent weeks may have helped to illuminate that challenge for some; but the dimensions of its threat have loomed large on the horizon for many years. Whatever our hopes may be for the future–for reducing this threat or living with it–there is no escaping either the gravity or the totality of its challenge to our survival and to our security–a challenge that confronts us in unaccustomed ways in every sphere of human activity.
This deadly challenge imposes upon our society two requirements of direct concern both to the press and to the President–two requirements that may seem almost contradictory in tone, but which must be reconciled and fulfilled if we are to meet this national peril. I refer, first, to the need for far greater public information; and, second, to the need for far greater official secrecy.
The very word “secrecy” is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it’s in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know.
But I do ask every publisher, every editor, and every newsman in the nation to reexamine his own standards, and to recognize the nature of our country’s peril. In time of war, the government and the press have customarily joined in an effort based largely on self-discipline, to prevent unauthorized disclosures to the enemy. In times of “clear and present danger,” the courts have held that even the privileged rights of the First Amendment must yield to the public’s need for national security.
Today no war has been declared and however fierce the struggle may be, it may never be declared in the traditional fashion. Our way of life is under attack. Those who make themselves our enemy are advancing around the globe. The survival of our friends is in danger. And yet no war has been declared, no borders have been crossed by marching troops, no missiles have been fired.
If the press is awaiting a declaration of war before it imposes the self-discipline of combat conditions, then I can only say that no war ever posed a greater threat to our security. If you are awaiting a finding of “clear and present danger,” then I can only say that the danger has never been more clear and its presence has never been more imminent.
It requires a change in outlook, a change in tactics, a change in missions–by the government, by the people, by every businessman or labor leader, and by every newspaper. For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence–on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations.
Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. It conducts the Cold War, in short, with a war-time discipline no democracy would ever hope or wish to match.
Nevertheless, every democracy recognizes the necessary restraints of national security–and the question remains whether those restraints need to be more strictly observed if we are to oppose this kind of attack as well as outright invasion.
For the facts of the matter are that this nation’s foes have openly boasted of acquiring through our newspapers information they would otherwise hire agents to acquire through theft, bribery or espionage; that details of this nation’s covert preparations to counter the enemy’s covert operations have been available to every newspaper reader, friend and foe alike; that the size, the strength, the location and the nature of our forces and weapons, and our plans and strategy for their use, have all been pinpointed in the press and other news media to a degree sufficient to satisfy any foreign power; and that, in at least in one case, the publication of details concerning a secret mechanism whereby satellites were followed required its alteration at the expense of considerable time and money.
The newspapers which printed these stories were loyal, patriotic, responsible and well-meaning. Had we been engaged in open warfare, they undoubtedly would not have published such items. But in the absence of open warfare, they recognized only the tests of journalism and not the tests of national security. And my question tonight is whether additional tests should not now be adopted.
That question is for you alone to answer. No public official should answer it for you. No governmental plan should impose its restraints against your will. But I would be failing in my duty to the nation, in considering all of the responsibilities that we now bear and all of the means at hand to meet those responsibilities, if I did not commend this problem to your attention, and urge its thoughtful consideration.
On many earlier occasions, I have said–and your newspapers have constantly said–that these are times that appeal to every citizen’s sense of sacrifice and self-discipline. They call out to every citizen to weigh his rights and comforts against his obligations to the common good. I cannot now believe that those citizens who serve in the newspaper business consider themselves exempt from that appeal.
I have no intention of establishing a new Office of War Information to govern the flow of news. I am not suggesting any new forms of censorship or new types of security classifications. I have no easy answer to the dilemma that I have posed, and would not seek to impose it if I had one. But I am asking the members of the newspaper profession and the industry in this country to reexamine their own responsibilities, to consider the degree and the nature of the present danger, and to heed the duty of self-restraint which that danger imposes upon us all.
Every newspaper now asks itself, with respect to every story: “Is it news?” All I suggest is that you add the question: “Is it in the interest of the national security?” And I hope that every group in America–unions and businessmen and public officials at every level will ask the same question of their endeavors, and subject their actions to the same exacting tests.
And should the press of America consider and recommend the voluntary assumption of specific new steps or machinery, I can assure you that we will cooperate whole-heartedly with those recommendations.
Perhaps there will be no recommendations. Perhaps there is no answer to the dilemma faced by a free and open society in a cold and secret war. In times of peace, any discussion of this subject, and any action that results, are both painful and without precedent. But this is a time of peace and peril which knows no precedent in history.
It is the unprecedented nature of this challenge that also gives rise to your second obligation–an obligation which I share and that is our obligation to inform and alert the American people to make certain that they possess all the facts that they need, and understand them as well–the perils, the prospects, the purposes of our program and the choices that we face.
No President should fear public scrutiny of his program. For from that scrutiny comes understanding; and from that understanding comes support or opposition and both are necessary. I am not asking your newspapers to support the Administration, but I am asking your help in the tremendous task of informing and alerting the American people. For I have complete confidence in the response and dedication of our citizens whenever they are fully informed.
I not only could not stifle controversy among your readers–I welcome it. This Administration intends to be candid about its errors; for as a wise man once said: “An error does not become a mistake until you refuse to correct it.” We intend to accept full responsibility for our errors and we expect you to point them out when we miss them.
Without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed and no republic can survive. That is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy. And that is why our press was protected by the First Amendment– the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution–not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and the sentimental, not to simply “give the public what it wants”–but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to lead, mold, educate and sometimes even anger public opinion.
This means greater coverage and analysis of international news–for it is no longer far away and foreign but close at hand and local. It means greater attention to improved understanding of the news as well as improved transmission. And it means, finally, that government at all levels, must meet its obligation to provide you with the fullest possible information outside the narrowest limits of national security–and we intend to do it.
It was early in the Seventeenth Century that Francis Bacon remarked on three recent inventions already transforming the world: the compass, gunpowder and the printing press. Now the links between the nations first forged by the compass have made us all citizens of the world, the hopes and threats of one becoming the hopes and threats of us all. In that one world’s efforts to live together, the evolution of gunpowder to its ultimate limit has warned mankind of the terrible consequences of failure.
And so it is to the printing press–to the recorder of man’s deeds, the keeper of his conscience, the courier of his news–that we look for strength and assistance, confident that with your help man will be what he was born to be: free and independent.
And this is Stephen Colberts modern adaptation of it.
85 per cent of all drugs produced in Afghanistan is being shipped aboard US aircraft. Foreign diplomats have stated that the United States military buy drugs from local Afghan drug lords who deal with field commanders overseeing eradication of drug production. The administration of President Hamid Karzai, including his two brothers, Kajum Karzai and Akhmed Vali Karzai, are involved in the CIA controlled narcotics trade – one of the main reasons why the U.S. installed Karzai as De facto president of Afghanistan.
“The Americans are working hard to keep narco business flourishing in both countries,” says Mikhail Khazin, president of the consultancy firm Niakon. “They consistently destroy the local infrastructure, pushing the local population to look for illegal means of subsistence. And the CIA [Central Intelligence Agency] provides protection to drug trafficking.”
U.S. freelance writer Dave Gibson recalled in an article published in the American Chronicle what a U.S. foreign intelligence official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, revealed of the CIA’s record of involvement with the international drug trade. The official said: “The CIA did almost the identical thing during the Vietnam War, which had catastrophic consequences – the increase in the heroin trade in the USA beginning in the 1970s is directly attributable to the CIA. The CIA has been complicit in the global drug trade for years, so I guess they just want to carry on their favourite business.”
UNITED NATIONS, May 18 — The first American narcotics experts to go to Afghanistan under Taliban rule have concluded that the movement’s ban on opium-poppy cultivation appears to have wiped out the world’s largest crop in less than a year, officials said today.
The American findings confirm earlier reports from the United Nations drug control program that Afghanistan, which supplied about three-quarters of the world’s opium and most of the heroin reaching Europe, had ended poppy planting in one season.
Under a U.S. and NATO occupation that wiped out Opium trade has been revived.
Afghan 2008 opium crop was second biggest: U.N. report
Afghanistan’s opium harvest … 2008 … was … the second biggest on record, a United Nations body declared.
While the area under cultivation was reduced by a fifth, better yields meant production dropped only 6 percent to 7,700 tons, after a record 8,200 tons in 2007, the U.N.’s International Narcotics Control Board said in its annual report.
More than seven years after the U.S.-led invasion, Afghanistan still grows more than 90 percent of the world’s illegal opium poppies, the source of heroin.
NATO forces are not allowed to eradicate crops although NATO allies agreed … to allow their soldiers to carry out direct attacks on Afghan drug lords and laboratories.
Afghan officials let drug traffickers operate with impunity and those who do target the opium trade risk their lives, the report said. Last year (2008), 78 officials trying to eradicate opium crops were killed, six times the toll in 2007.
Air America Afghanistan
Air America was an American passenger and cargo airline established in 1950 and covertly owned and operated by the Central Intelligence Agency’s (CIA) Special Activities Division from 1950 to 1976. It supplied and supported US covert operations in Southeast Asia during the Vietnam War.
Air America transported opium and heroin on behalf of Hmong leader Vang Pao. This has been supported by former Laos CIA paramilitary Anthony Poshepny, former Air America pilots, U.S. diplomats, former DEA agents, Congressional oversight committees and other people involved in the war.
University of Georgia historian William M. Leary claims that this was done without the airline employees’ direct knowledge (except for those employees that said they did know about it), and that the airline itself did not trade in drugs (only transported them).
Air America officially disbanded on June 30, 1976, and was later purchased by Evergreen International Airlines, which continues to provide support for U.S. covert operations.
Today Air America has been revived by the CIA, this time using U.S. military aircraft to transport the illegal drugs out of Afghanistan and into the United States.
This is about cocaine but it explains the relationship between all the actors involved in illegal drug trade. Good song.
Or if you are less than convinced of the dodgy history of government drug dealing, check out:
Russian government officials, police, doctors are giving full security & looking after the baby. Hundreds Of People Converting After Watching This Video If you want to see the 9 months baby you can go to Russia.
Qur’anic verses have reportedly appeared on the body of a nine-month old boy named Ali from the Russian Republic of Dagestan.
Since his birth, birthmarks in the form of Arabic script have been appearing on Ali’s body. First, there were individual letters but then texts began appearing, the Russian-language Vesti news channel quoted his parents as saying on Thursday.
“First, there was a hematoma on his chin. When the bruise went off, we saw the word “Allah,” Ali’s mother Madina Yakubova said.
Surprisingly, one of the baby’s legs has an inscription, “Allah is the creator of all entities.”
The TV channel reported that Ali was first diagnosed with “ischemic heart disease of the second degree” and “infantile cerebral paralysis” in the maternity clinic. However, after the inexplicable events began happening, he was examined again and found healthy.
The incident has been drawing hundreds of Dagestani Muslims to Ali’s home everyday, prompting local authorities to guard the house round-the-clock.
So I stumbled across this insane forum post the other day that showed how the Coke logo could be manipulated into saying some insanely offensive things to Muslims. I had to check it out for myself because I am well aware of the hidden symbolism the cattle herders hide under our noses. So if you are Muslim you might want to double check this, its pretty blatant. I had to make it for myself to find how many changes required. Two. Only two changes. Thats dispicable.
This email is my outlet for the utter disgust I currently have with our government. What are you thinking by entertaining this preposterous idea of signing Australia away to some international treaty? I am still hearing comments by certain senators that this deal won’t be handing the future of this beautiful country over to global governance!
“A deal must include an equitable global governance structure.” – United Nations Secretary General Ban-Ki Moon
“2009 is also the first year of global governance with the establishment of the G20 in the middle of the financial crisis the climate conference in Copenhagen is another step towards the global management of our planet” – EU President Rompuy
Ignoring the recent revelations that have occurred regarding the manipulated global warming data, and the disturbing fact that even the RAW data is no where to be found, there is such a biased view towards man made global warming it appears that a large number of you are suffering from an endemic crisis of SELECTIVE HEARING. There is an equally large proportion of scientists that are red in the face from trying to yell their opposition to this unproven ‘theory’ of man made global warming, just because their voices have been muffled but a terribly biased media.
If CO2 is a pollutant then what is next? Everyone in the world having to apply for a permit to EXHALE? I wouldn’t put it past some of these corporate bureaucrats.
This is indeed a terrifying time to be alive. I can’t possibly imagine the road that lies ahead if this SCAM passes. Our children and children’s children will be paying the most unreasonable and blatantly enslaving TAX known — for what purpose? How can any of you live with yourselves after a decision like this. Talk about shooting from the hip, blindly.
While I agree that people need to step up to the plate to reduce their pollutants, we DO NOT need to lock ourselves into a disgustingly gouging treaty that is going to destroy this country financially when there are so many other priorities and alternatives to concentrate on.
con⋅spir⋅a⋅cy
–noun, plural -cies. 1. the act of conspiring.
2. an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot.
3. a combination of persons for a secret, unlawful, or evil purpose: He joined the conspiracy to overthrow the government.
4. Law. an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act.
5. any concurrence in action; combination in bringing about a given result.
There is no other way to describe this appalling ‘global warming scam’. Everyone that has bought into it should be ashamed of themselves for betraying the Australian people by refusing to present both sides of the story fairly. Senator Wong, brazenly admitting you do not care about polls shows your contempt and disregard for the opinion of the Australian people, you should be ashamed of yourself – who do you represent? The people or the corporate beneficiaries?
I truly hope this issue can be resolved honestly and for the actual BENEFIT of the Australian people,
A rainbow is an optical and meteorological phenomenon that causes a spectrum of light to appear in the sky when the Sun shines onto droplets of moisture in the Earth’s atmosphere. They take the form of a multicoloured arc, with red on the outer part of the arch and violet on the inner section of the arch. A rainbow spans a continuous spectrum of colours; the discrete bands are an artefact of human colour vision. The most commonly cited and remembered sequence, in English, is Newton’s sevenfold red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo and violet (popularly memorized by mnemonics like Roy G. Biv). Rainbows can be caused by other forms of water than rain, including mist, spray, and dew.
Rainbows can be observed whenever there are water drops in the air and sunlight shining from behind a person at a low altitude angle (on the ground). The most spectacular rainbow displays happen when half of the sky is still dark with raining clouds and the observer is at a spot with clear sky in the direction of the Sun. The result is a luminous rainbow that contrasts with the darkened background.
The rainbow effect is also commonly seen near waterfalls or fountains. In addition, the effect can be artificially created by dispersing water droplets into the air during a sunny day. Rarely, a moonbow, lunar rainbow or nighttime rainbow, can be seen on strongly moonlit nights. As human visual perception for colour is poor in low light, moonbows are often perceived to be white. It is difficult to photograph the complete semi-circle of a rainbow in one frame, as this would require an angle of view of 84°. For a 35 mm camera, a lens with a focal length of 19 mm or less wide-angle lens would be required. Now that powerful software for stitching several images into a panorama is available, images of the entire arc and even secondary arcs can be created fairly easily from a series of overlapping frames. From an aeroplane, one has the opportunity to see the whole circle of the rainbow, with the plane’s shadow in the centre. This phenomenon can be confused with the glory, but a glory is usually much smaller, covering only 5°–20°. At good visibility conditions (for example, a dark cloud behind the rainbow), the second arc can be seen, with inverse order of colours. At the background of the blue sky, the second arc is barely visible.
The Persian physicist and polymath, Ibn al-Haytham (Alhazen; 965-1039), attempted to provide a scientific explanation for the rainbow phenomenon. In his Maqala fi al-Hala wa Qaws Quzah (On the Rainbow and Halo), he “explained the formation of rainbow as an image, which forms at a concave mirror. If the rays of light coming from a farther light source reflect to any point on axis of the concave mirror, they form concentric circles in that point. When it is supposed that the sun as a farther light source, the eye of viewer as a point on the axis of mirror and a cloud as a reflecting surface, then it can be observed the concentric circles are forming on the axis.” He was not able to verify this because his theory that “light from the sun is reflected by a cloud before reaching the eye” did not allow for a possible experimental verification. This explanation was later repeated by Averroes, and, though incorrect, provided the groundwork for the correct explanations later given by Kamāl al-Dīn al-Fārisī (1267-ca.1319/1320) and Theodoric of Freiberg.
Ibn al-Haytham’s contemporary, the Persian philosopher and polymath Ibn Sīnā (Avicenna; 980-1037), provided an alternative explanation, writing “that the bow is not formed in the dark cloud but rather in the very thin mist lying between the cloud and the sun or observer. The cloud, he thought, serves simply as the background of this thin substance, much as a quicksilver lining is placed upon the rear surface of the glass in a mirror. Ibn Sīnā would change the place not only of the bow, but also of the colour formation, holding the iridescence to be merely a subjective sensation in the eye.” This explanation, however, was also incorrect.[10]
In Song Dynasty China (960–1279), a polymathic scholar-official named Shen Kuo (1031–1095) hypothesized—as a certain Sun Sikong (1015–1076) did before him—that rainbows were formed by a phenomenon of sunlight encountering droplets of rain in the air. Paul Dong writes that Shen’s explanation of the rainbow as a phenomenon of atmospheric refraction “is basically in accord with modern scientific principles.”
The Persian astronomer, Qutb al-Din al-Shirazi (1236–1311), gave a fairly accurate explanation for the rainbow phenomenon. This was elaborated on by his student, Kamāl al-Dīn al-Fārisī (1260–1320), who gave a more mathematically satisfactory explanation of the rainbow. He “proposed a model where the ray of light from the sun was refracted twice by a water droplet, one or more reflections occurring between the two refractions.” He verified this through extensive experimentation using a transparent sphere filled with water and a camera obscura. As he noted in his Kitab Tanqih al-Manazir (The Revision of the Optics), al-Farisi used a large clear vessel of glass in the shape of a sphere, which was filled with water, in order to have an experimental large-scale model of a rain drop. He then placed this model within a camera obscura that has a controlled aperture for the introduction of light. He projected light unto the sphere and ultimately deducted through several trials and detailed observations of reflections and refractions of light that the colours of the rainbow are phenomena of the decomposition of light. His research had resonances with the studies of his contemporary Theodoric of Freiberg (without any contacts between them; even though they both relied on Ibn al-Haytham’s legacy), and later with the experiments of Descartes and Newton in dioptrics (for instance, Newton conducted a similar experiment at Trinity College, though using a prism rather than a sphere).
In Europe, Ibn al-Haytham’s Book of Optics was translated into Latin and studied by Robert Grosseteste. His work on light was continued by Roger Bacon, who wrote in his Opus Majus of 1268 about experiments with light shining through crystals and water droplets showing the colours of the rainbow. Theodoric of Freiberg is known to have given an accurate theoretical explanation of both the primary and secondary rainbows in 1307. He explained the primary rainbow, noting that “when sunlight falls on individual drops of moisture, the rays undergo two refractions (upon ingress and egress) and one reflection (at the back of the drop) before transmission into the eye of the observer”. He explained the secondary rainbow through a similar analysis involving two refractions and two reflections.
“(…) Perhaps those agencies, combined with UNEP and the United Nations population agencies, might eventually be developed into a Planetary Regime- sort of an international superagency for population, resources, and environment. Such a comprehensive Planetary Regime could control the development, administration, conservation, and distribution of all natural resources, renewable or nonrenewable, at least insofar as international implications exist. Thus, the Regime could have the power to control pollution not only in the atmosphere and the oceans, but also in such freshwater bodies as rivers and lakes that cross international boundaries or that discharge into the oceans. The Regime might also be a logical central agency for regulating all international trade, perhaps including assistance from DC’s and LDC’s, and including all food on the international market. The Planetary Regime might be given responsibility for determining the optimum population for the world and or each region and for arbitrating various countries’ shares within their regional limits. Control of population size might remain the responsibility of each government, but the Regime should have some power to enforce the agreed limits.” John P. Holdren, Paul and Anne Ehrlich, Ecoscience, 1977
World Elites
The Copenhagen conference on climate change at the beginning of next month seeks to, according to its creators, “reach a new global accord to replace the 1997 Kyoto Protocol to curb emissions of greenhouse gases”. UN-front man Ban Ki-Moon remarked at a preparation speech on the road to Copenhagen that “sooner or later there will be a higher price on carbon – imposed either by policy or by market forces.” All this just rolls off the tongs of these transnationalist as if they are whistling a tune while tending their garden. If there was no such thing as historic fact, it would sound noble, urgent, and necessary. Unfortunately, we know precisely what motivates the initiators of this global effort: profit, absolute control and- I almost forgot- depopulation of the world’s inhabitants. This garden the elite is cultivating is by no means a place of joy. It stinks of rotten weeds and dead foliage.
In this first of several articles, I set out to identify the blueprint of modern day eugenics and its intimate ties to the environmental movement. In fact, the more one researches this union, forged in the blood of millions in the last century, the more one realises that the anthropogenic global warming swindle is not just tied to eugenics. It is eugenics.
In 1968 a think-tank emerged out of the back alleys of the face-lifted eugenics movement called the Club of Rome. Nurtured from its very conception as a beacon of light to which all environmentalist ships should navigate, its creators knew that the green movement they had set out to create, was designed to blame man for the supposed predicament the earth was in. As a consequence the number of people should be reduced lest the earth crumble under his crushing weight. The only thing to be done, so argued the Club, was for a global body of power to enforce depopulation goals as decided upon by the global elite.
Of what people does this global elite consist? Well just google ‘Club of Rome members’ and compare the names on the membership lists with those on the list of attendants of the annual Bilderberg conferences and you will discover the very same cast of characters, setting up the rules in the New World Order. You’ll find Al Gore, David Rockefeller, Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands, and all the other enemies of all free humanity and their cronies.
In 1972, the self described “group of world citizens, sharing a common concern for the future of humanity” published their (in)famous “The Limits to Growth”. In this document the authors point-blank argue for the population to shrink if mother earth is to survive much longer: “The overwhelming growth in world population”, claim the authors, “caused by the positive birth-rate loop is a recent phenomenon, a result of mankind’s very successful reduction of worldwide mortality.”
This development is highly worrisome, says the Club of Rome. As possible solutions for this “problem” it proposes either the birthrate to be brought down “to equal the new, lower death rate”, or “the death rate must rise again.” The following example will show that these statements by the world’s upper elites are in no way innocent musings without consequence.
Contrary to popular belief, the original architect of China’s policies was neither Mao Zedong in a power-drunk whim nor a Party-sadist hatching eugenics in some sub-level torture chamber. According to anthropologist Susan Greenhalgh in her study ‘Just One Child: Science and Policy in Deng’s China’ the inspiration for the tyrannical move by the Chinese Communist Party was inspired first and foremost by the Club of Rome.
In the early seventies, a group of Chinese scientists visited several scientific conferences in Europe, and readily picked up on the ideas distributed by the Club of Rome. At the head of this Chinese delegation was a man credited for introducing China’s notorious one-child policies, source of so much hardship suffered by the Chinese people in the last decades.
Greenhalgh points out that the infamous policy “had roots in missile scientists’ exposure to and import of Club of Rome population concepts through international conferences in the 1970s.”
The ‘missile scientists’ Greenhalgh mentions, are Dr. Song Jian and company, visiting several conferences in Europe in the 1970s designed to further the glory and prestige of the People’s Republic of China around the world. They picked up and further developed several methods to calculate population rates on blueprint models used by the Club of Rome to calculate their scams into creation.
The fact that the Club of Rome stands at the cradle of one-child policies may not come as a complete surprise to those who have read all the policy-papers issued from the seventies onward. The same Malthusian idea that triggered our current green movement and its obsession with man-made global warming mythology once inspired hardcore involuntary sterilization policies in the decades preceding World War II.
In order to force a rising death rate into being one needs to create “a common motivation, namely a common adversary, to organize and act together in a vacuum; such a motivation must be found to bring the divided nations together to face an outside enemy, either a real one or else one invented for the purpose.”
In the 1991 publication “The First Global Revolution: A Report to the Club of Rome” by Alexander King and Bertrand Schneider, the common denominator that the world would need to rally around was identified in all clarity:
“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution,the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.”
This contrived and purposeful enemy arrived in the shape of man-made global warming. And to think that all of us gullible gadgets were fooled into believing that any climate change was caused by that big lamp in the sky, determining not just earth’s overall temperatures but those of all planets in the solar system.
It just goes to show that the scam is perpetrated on such an unprecedented scale, that few dare question its validity. The entire thing of course boils down to the old Nazi proverb: the bigger the lie, the easier the sell. The United Nations, the globalist foremost salesman, was designated to carry the message along to all the world’s ‘regions’ and all nation-states falling under her jurisdiction. The division of the UN deemed most qualified to do the job was UNESCO, the scientific arm deciding what educational programs are to be distributed amongst the world’s universities and primary schools. On June 15th of this year, Martin Lees, Secretary General of the Club of Rome gave a speech to UNESCO- social engineers in which he admits that:
“We in the Club of Rome have had a long relationship with UNESCO. We look forward to developing our future collaboration so that we can advance our understanding and cooperation to promote action on the critical global issues which will determine the future of us all at this difficult moment in history.”
To understand what this collaboration between the Club of Rome and UNESCO will specifically entail, Mr. Lees provides us with the agenda leading up to and following the Copenhagen conference next month. Just so you know what to expect from the social engineers in the year to come:
“In October 2009, we will focus at our Annual General Assembly in Amsterdam on “Environment, Energy and Economic Recovery” focused on the key issues for the Copenhagen Climate Conference. In February 2010 we will tackle Cluster Three, on International Development. In April 2010 we will focus on Cluster Four, Social Transformation and in July 2010, on Peace and Security. The Programme will conclude with a major event in November 2010.”
The agenda shows that the Copenhagen conference is not an isolated happening. It is just one piece of the overall global architecture the elite is constructing and with which it means to consolidate power in the 21st century. Or, as the Secretary General of the Club of Rome puts it:
“Issues of international governance and institutional architecture will be critical in particular to the effective implementation of a post-Kyoto Treaty. To address the underlying drivers of climate change, institutional mechanisms must be introduced or adapted to implement and coordinate new policies in key areas of concentration such as: finance; science and technology; human resource development; information and communications; and capacity building. And the issue of “climate justice” will be central to achieving any agreement and to the acceptance of any treaty.”
Irrespective of these world players’ vested interest in such an architecture, they all dance to the tune of eugenics- whether they are aware of it or not. It can be to further their career or some sadist pleasure in usurping innocence; whatever their motivation, they have openly declared themselves to be on the opposite site of humanity.
1) Fluoride’s ability to damage the brain represents one of the most active areas of research on fluoride toxicity today.
2) The research on fluoride and the brain has been fueled by 18 human studies from China, India, Iran, and Mexico finding elevated levels of fluoride exposure to be associated with IQ deficits in children. Fluoride’s impact on IQ is exacerbated among children with low-iodine exposure.
3) The impact of fluoride on children’s IQ has been documented even after controlling for children’s lead exposure, iodine exposure, parental education and income status, and other known factors that might impact the results (Rocha-Amador 2007; Xiang 2003 a,b).
4) In addition to IQ studies, 3 studies (Yu 1996; Du 1992; Han 1989) have found that fluoride accumulates in the brain of the fetus, causing damage to cells and neurotransmitters and 1 study (Li 2004) has found a correlation between exposure to fluoride during fetal development and behavioral deficits among neonates.
5) Several recent studies have found that even adult exposures to fluoride may result in central nervous system disturbances, particularly among industrial workers.
5) The findings of neurological effects in fluoride-exposed humans is consistent with, and strengthened by, recent findings from over 40 animal studies published since 1992. As with the studies on humans, the studies on animals have reported an impairment in learning and memory prorcesses among the fluoride-treated groups.
6) The animal studies have also documented considerable evidence of direct toxic effects of fluoride on brain tissue, even at levels as low as 1 ppm fluoride in water (Varner 1998). These effects include:
– reduction in nicotinic acetylcholine receptors;
– reduction in lipid content;
– impaired anti-oxidant defense systems;
– damage to the hippocampus;
– damage to the purkinje cells;
– increased uptake of aluminum;
– formation of beta-amyloid plaques (the classic brain abnormality in Alzheimer’s disease);
– exacerbation of lesions induced by iodine deficiency; and
– accumulation of fluoride in the pineal gland.
Here is also another SHIT LOAD of Links for you to see.
1. Email your local government representatives and let them know exactly how you feel about global governence. Forward this email to your friends and get them to do the same.
2. Letterbox drop of leaflets to raise awareness. (leaflet templates can be found on 4) Paper is cheap – 20 dollars could motivate another 50 people to join the cause.
3. Contact everyone on your social networking list, forward a specific flyer or website – ask them to pass it on. Virulence is the name of the game.
4. Contribute to the anti global government representative contact list. (Initiate a central resource for people to contribute from all over the world to easily locate contact details for every singlegovernment representative for the world (localised details eg. politicians from Sydney, Australia). If we are heading towards a global government, maybe global participation and unification can work against the machine – 1 stop resource for all your dissenting needs. A database/website would need to be set up for this step but I envision it would be a heavily contributed towards and utilized resource.
5. If you have contacted a politician/representative regarding a certain issue, maybe your letter can serve as a template for other people to utilize. Some people aren’t as capable of expressing their thoughts as clearly and professionally as others and could benefit from you. Contribute these templates to 4.
6. Stick with the real issues and avoid talking about circumstantial conspiracies that lend no credibility to the cause.
7. Always offer a solution to those that you try to educate – people hate feeling ‘useless’ and when facing the real issues a majority are left helpless. There is something you can do about it – see above.
8. Start utilizing your social networking website for getting the truth out there, alot more people will wake up once they notice a big chunk of their friends list share the same views as each other. Turn the minority into the majority.
9. Stop supporting the machine, and support the ones with a message. If you know of a musician that is trying to get the word out eg. Immortal Technique. Buy their album and support them – their message is reaching THOUSANDS of people daily and people like this need all the support they can get to rise above the machine. At the same time, stop giving your money to artists that couldn’t give a shit about the people – artists are nothing without the fanbase.
10. Get politically motivated. Protests happen all the time – find out where and when they are occurring and encourage your friends to get involved. (Could also be part of 4)
11. Donate money to a worthy cause. Think about it, a can of soft drink costs 2 dollars. If everyone that reads this donates 2 dollars to the same fund – there will be AT LEAST $10, 000 going to something worthwhile. Remember — support the people and STOP SUPPORTING THE MACHINE.
12. Email your thoughts / ideas / support to those in the spot light. The job most of them have endowed upon themselves is massively daunting and every piece of positivity they read IS encouraging. They are people too and face ALOT of shit on a day to day basis. Encourage them, thank them.
13. Burn DVDs. Lots of them. Most people can’t sit in front of a computer to watch a documentary – take the initiative to burn copies for family members and close friends. Once they have watched it, tell them to pass it on. Chinese whispers is effective if the message doesn’t get distorted. Awareness is the first step, and these documentaries build awareness.
14. Complain to your local newspapers that they aren’t doing a good job reporting the real issues in the world. Tell them that you are disgusted by their total omission on some heavy topics that should have been in the latest issues. (Contact details for these newspapers/media can be contributed to 4)
15. Stay motivated and positive. As Alex Jones says in waking life – Humanity is still good, we are gonna win this thing!
But where did this new form of H1N1 come from? Just like the ‘swine flu’ it appeared from apparently nowhere. how ever, if we do a little digging we can surely come up with more than enough to link it to this multi billion dollar corporation, known for ‘accidentally’ killing people through contaminated vaccines and injections. Recently, a man named Joseph Moshe was arrested in America under the pretense of threatening Barack Obama, and/or other members of the White House. This story disappeared from the mainstream news within days of its release, and only now evidence of this ‘threat’ can only be found on conspiratorial news websites.
Why was this story so important and relevant? Joseph Moshe indeed HAD’NT threatened the White House – or anything of that sort. Moshe instead had called into a governmental institution and warned them that Baxter International had intended to create a bio weapon, disguised as a vaccination, and desired to release it into the population. All of this would have sounded far fetched if Joseph Moshe had turned out to be a carpenter from Jerusalem. Instead, we find out that Joseph Moshe was a microbiologist and all of a sudden his claims of bio terrorism carry an enormous amount of weight. So why is Moshe so relevant then? Joseph Moshe, in the hours leading up to his arrest in the USA, had claimed that Baxter was intending to release this Bio weapon INSIDE THE UKRAINE!
All of a sudden, two months ago this story breaks and disappears and only NOW recently what was being claimed then, seems to be eventuating. You don’t have to be a ‘conspiracy theorist’ to realize that this is way more involved than a simple coincidence. What proved to me the credibility of this mans claims, was the fact that he can be seen sitting in the car, quite calm and collected AFTER 3 CANISTERS OF TEAR GAS have been fired into his vehicle, and he has been throughly hosed down with pepper spray.
Usually a man would be reduced to a blubbering wreck in the face of that much tear gas – fighting to breath and basically fighting to live. But as you can see clearly above, there is a man simply looking calmly out the window at the shit storm flaring up around him. Joseph Moshe was able to contain himself due to his Mossad training (Israeli secret service)which means he was as hard as nails.
Baxter is at the center of everything because this wouldn’t be the first time they have tried to spark a catastrophic epidemic. They have been caught RED HANDED spreading a live, genetically engineered H5N1 Bird Flu biological weapon, hidden inside standard HUMAN FLU vaccinations. Only by chance was this discovered by a scientist in czech – he had injected a ferret to test the vaccine, when the ferrets all died he knew something was up. Its ok tho, because they are being sued as we speak (put your hand up if you have faith in the legal system…..yarightlol) and again by Dr Leonard Horowitz and also Jane Burgermeister.
So, they have finally figured out they had better start warning everyone about the risks of electromagnetic radiation. The timing couldn’t come any better – the industry is so fully embedded into society now that is way too late to ‘pull out’. Just like cigarettes, ‘they’ get the population to adapt their lifestyles to not only facilitate the product, ‘they’ wait until society has properly curled its evolutionary fingers around tight enough to form a strong, golf-like grip lock onto it making it neigh impossible to relinquish. I personally haven’t used a mobile phone for 4 years. Yay me I guess, too bad I’m a heavy smoker otherwise I could actually boast of a hugely proportional health factor over the standard person. If I had a fitness routine I would probably have a job opening as the governor of California’s bullet man, you know the guy that assassins shoot at thinking they are gonna get the real target.
That just sentence just got this blog a few extra hits from the MIC =) Hey guys!
The ‘report’ isn’t officially out yet, but if you aren’t simply a head in a box on a shelf you know that 2+2=4 and electromagnetic radiation fucks with your DNA. Thats right, when our bodies generate new cells it gets this cellular data from our DNA. If our DNA is rooted – our cells are rooted. What has me ticked however, is not just the fact that we got suckered into a Tobacco Industry2.0 it’s that there is umpteen million cellular transmission towers everywhere. We now depend on wireless internet and have those devices to worry about aswell.
Lets just say this ‘report’ actually makes it’s way to public arena. What then? Do we start banning advertising of mobile phones? Do we get to sue phone manufacturers for any tumors we might develop down the track? Whats the next step? I can’t see any of that happening. I cant even see the report getting released to the public.
Dr Charlie Teo
“Even though the jury’s not in, just to err on the side of safety I would try and limit the amount of electromagnetic radiation that you’re exposed to,” Dr Charlie Teo said. Doesn’t it suck having your balls firmly gripped between the vices of any professional industry. This is a man that cuts tumors out of peoples brains every single day. He knows for a fact that mobile phones boil your cells and cause cancer but he cant officially tell you, since the ‘report’ isn’t out yet. NaturalNews back in 2008 wrote about how mobile phones increase the chance that you will develop cancer of the salivary glands, your mouth area if you are anatomically ignorant, by as much as 50%! Thats a pretty huge increase, almost big enough that you could compare those chances to winning on a ♣black or ♥red gamble at the pokies.
Its makes me sick to my stomach when I see children using mobile phones. It makes me sick to my stomach when I see women, obviously pregnant pouring their hearts and souls into the Cancer Brick®. Indeed it will be a sad day when the ‘report’ is released, a violent ‘I told you so’ pointed and aimed at someone like Crazy John would be in order – the new Camel like figurehead of the industry – and probably just be muted by the thick wadding of billions of dollars wrapped around his ears.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/33/Land_Warrior_Iraq_071307.jpg/800px-Land_Warrior_Iraq_071307.jpg
