Hillary’s long-awaited Benghazi testimony Hillary’s ‘Double Vision’ seems to be catching in Obama Administration

Hillary’s long-awaited Benghazi testimony

Hillary’s ‘Double Vision’ seems to be catching in Obama Administration

- Judi McLeod (Bio and Archives)  Friday, January 25, 2013           http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/52651

---

Today’s mainstream media ‘scoops’ are written by nincompoops.
Proof of it comes in the headlines the day after Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s Senate ‘testimony’ about the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Libya and what and when the administration for which she works knew:
“Daily News analysis points out the Secretary of State may suffer from vision impairments following a concussion and blood clot near her brain.”
“Is Hillary seeing double?” the newspaper asks.
Could be.  She testified in doublespeak leaving more questions than answers during Wednesday’s testimony.
Never has more tea and sympathy been laid on a Secretary of State during whose watch four Americans died without any response to their repeated calls for help.
“A close inspection of Hillary Clinton’s glasses worn during her Wednesday testimony on Benghazi shows an adhesive Fresnel prism, which is usually used to ‘bring things into focus’ for those with double vision or muscle weakness in the eye.” (Daily News, Jan. 24, 2013).
That’s what the mainstream media got out of Hillary’s long-awaited Benghazi testimony?
“Clinton’s spokesman confirmed Thursday night she is wearing the glasses as a result of the fall and concussion she suffered last month, but he did not elaborate.”
No one in the current administration elaborates much on things that matter.  Official campaign papers indicating that Clinton’s 2008 presidential debt of $25-30 million was paid—including the final payment of $73,000—were filed just two days before her Benghazi testimony.  While she was basking in the praise of a job well done from senators, including Republican ones, the mainstream media was reporting that Lady Gaga had led a second night of late-night dancing during White House Inauguration activities.
Some may be forgiven for thinking that Clinton had vision problems long before the Daily News identified the Fresnel prism sticker placed on her glasses.
Like her boss President Barack Hussein Obama and colleague, former UN Secretary Susan Rice, all Clinton saw in the Benghazi Blame Game was a video they said was responsible for a protest that never happened as the cause for the deaths of four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens.
The trio stuck to the video/protest story for five straight days running and only one senator’s question—reworded at that—wanted to know why.

“It is telling that the elected officials spent more time fawning over Hillary Rodham Clinton’s alleged medical issues from which she’s recovered, rather than attempting to learn the truth behind the brutal, agonizing and possibly preventable deaths of four Americans. One result from yesterday’s hearings was immediately evident in the Progressive media’s reports, particularly by Lawrence O’Donnell, who crowed that Hillary Clinton had put to rest “conspiracy theories” associated with the attacks in Benghazi. Sadly, O’Donnell and his ilk are more concerned over the future political viability of their “sacred cow” instead of exposing the truth behind an event that not only took American lives, but has hastened U.S. involvement into a life-changing global conflict. (Doug Hagmann, Jan. 24, 2013).
“Out of hours of “testimony” and pages of written transcripts, the most telling moment came in response to Senator Ron Johnson’s rewording of a question relating to the motive and origin of the attack. His persistence caused Clinton to raise her voice and flirt with hysteria, shouting:

“With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night decided to go kill some Americans? What difference, at this point, does it make?”

“Her incomprehensible response offered a glimpse behind the curtain of deception, yet that tear in the fabric of lies was left open but ignored as if following the line of questioning would reveal too much.”

Meanwhile, in a world where government cover ups come airtight, it’s hard to say who is better at enabling the Democrats circling the administration wagons, Republican senators or the mainstream media.
Copyright © Canada Free Press
RSS Feed for Judi McLeod
Judi McLeod is an award-winning journalist with 30 years’ experience in the print media. A former Toronto Sun columnist, she also worked for the Kingston Whig Standard. Her work has appeared on Rush Limbaugh, Newsmax.com, Drudge Report, Foxnews.com, and Glenn Beck.
Judi can be emailed at: judi@canadafreepress.com

Kim Dotcom wants to encrypt half of the Internet to end government surveillance (FULL RT INTERVIEW)

Kim Dotcom wants to encrypt half of the Internet to end government surveillance (FULL RT INTERVIEW)

Published: 25 January, 2013, 04:10                 http://rt.com/usa/news/kim-dotcom-interview-mega-673/
Edited: 25 January, 2013, 14:46

Photo by Andrew Blake

(167.7Mb) embed video

In an in-depth interview, Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom discusses the investigation against his now-defunct file-storage site, his possible extradition to the US, the future of Internet freedoms and his latest project Mega with RT’s Andrew Blake.

Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom (C) launches his new file sharing site "Mega", surrounded by dancers, in Auckland January 20, 2013. (Reuters/Nigel Marple)

The United States government says that Dotcom, a German millionaire formerly known as Kim Schmitz, masterminded a vast criminal conspiracy by operating the file-storage site Megaupload. Dotcom, on the other hand, begs to differ. One year after the high-profile raid of his home and the shut-down and seizure of one of the most popular sites on the Web, Dotcom hosted a launch party for his latest endeavor, simply called Mega. On the anniversary of the end of Megaupload, Dotcom discusses the year since his arrest and what the future holds in regards to both his court case and the Internet alike. Speaking with RT’s Andrew Blake from his Coatesville, New Zealand mansion, Dotcom weighs in on the US justice system, the death of Aaron Swartz, the growing surveillance state, his own cooperation with the feds and much more.

Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom (2nd R) poseswith actors dessed as police after the launch of his new website at a press conference held inside his home in Auckland on January 20, 2013. (AFP Photo/Michael Bradley)

'­Hollywood is a very important contributor to Obama'

RT: You’ve blamed President Obama and the Obama administration for colluding with movie companies in order to orchestrate this giant arrest here in New Zealand. Is this kind of give-and-take relationship between Washington and Hollywood all that you say it is? Or are you just the exception? Does this really exist?
Kim Dotcom: You have to look at the players behind this case, okay? The driving force, of course, is Chris Dodd, the chairman of the MPAA [Motion Picture Association of America]. And he was senator for a long time and he is — according to [US Vice President] Joe Biden — Joe Biden’s best friend. And the state attorney that is in charge of this case has been Joe Biden’s personal counsel, Neil MacBride, and [he] also worked as an anti-piracy manager for the BSA, the Business Software Association, which is basically like the MPAA but for software companies.
And also, the timing is very interesting, you know? Election time. The fundraisers in Hollywood set for February, March [and] April. There had to have some sort of Plan B, an alternative for SOPA [the Stop Online Piracy Act], because the president certainly was aware — and his team at the White House was aware — that if they don’t have anything to give at those fundraisers, to those guys in Hollywood who are eager to have more control over the Internet, they wouldn’t have probably raised too much. And Hollywood is a very important contributor to Obama’s campaign. Not just with money, but also with media support. They control a lot of media: celebrity endorsements and all that.
So I’m sure the election plays an important role. The relationships of the people that are in charge of this case play an important role and, of course, we have facts that we want to present at our extradition hearing that will show some more detail about this and that this is not just some conspiracy theory but that this actually happened.

Local Maori arrive as Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom (unseen) launches his new file sharing site "Mega" in Auckland January 20, 2013. (Reuters/Nigel Marple)

'Operation Takedown'

RT: The US Justice Department wants to extradite you, a German citizen living in New Zealand operating a business in Hong Kong. They want to extradite you to the US. Is that even possible?
KD: That is a very interesting question because the extradition law, the extradition treaty in New Zealand, doesn’t really allow extradition for copyright. So what they did, they threw some extra charges on top and one of them is racketeering, where they basically say we are a mafia organization and we set up our Internet business to basically be an organized crime network that was set up and structured the way it was just to do criminal copyright infringement. And anyone who has every used Megaupload and has any idea about how that website worked knows immediately that it was total nonsense. But they needed to chop that on in order to have even a chance for extradition. But in our opinion, you see, all of that was secondary. The primary goal was to take down Megaupload and destroy it completely. That was their mission and that’s why the whole thing in Hong Kong, for example, they called it Operation Takedown. And I think everything that’s happening now, they are trying on the fly to doctor it around, and found a way to find a case. They probably came here and thought, “We will find something; that these guys have done something wrong.” In the indictment, if you actually read that, it’s more like a press release. There’s nothing in there that has any merits.

Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom speaks during the launch of his new website at a press conference at his mansion in Auckland on January 20, 2013. (AFP Photo/Michael Bradley)

RT: When the raid happened one year ago today, it got a lot of people talking both about the Internet and about this character, Kim Dotcom. But it was a lot of talking and not so much action, because here it is one year later and this case is still happening. Back up earlier this month, and we saw Aaron Swartz — an online information activist — pass away, and only in his mid-20s. And it got a lot of people talking, so much so that members of Congress have actually asked for changes to federal computer laws so that this doesn’t happen again. What is it actually going to take to get people to stop just talking and to actually start acting?
KD: Our case is going to be the one that will have much more attention down the road because it is a crucial case for Internet freedom. And I think more and more people realize that and the government is quite exposed here because they really went in with completely prosecutorial abuse and overreach and ignoring due process, ignoring our rights, spying on us, illegal search warrants, illegal restraining orders, illegal spying. The whole picture, when you look at it, shows that this was an urgent mission, done on a rush. “Take them down, I want them to go.” And it was a political decision to do that. And the execution was extremely poor, and the case is extremely poor, because that is something they thought that they could worry about later. It was all about the takedown. “Let’s send a strong message to Hollywood that we are on their side.”
RT:And now it’s been a year and nothing has progressed. At least for them. It seems like the case is falling apart day by day.
KD: Let me give you one example of how crazy this is. We have a judge here who said, “Please show us your evidence about your racketeering allegations. Show us that these guys were setting up some sort of organized crime network,” because that’s what the extradition will focus on primarily. They are using the organized crime treaty to get us extradited. So the US appealed that and said, “We don’t want to show you what we have.” And then they appealed to the high court and the high court then said, “We want to see it.” And they just keep appealing it, all the way to the court of appeals and to the Supreme Court. And what does that tell you? If you don’t even want to show us your cards — show us what you have! If you have such a strong case and are seriously interested about getting someone extradited, why waste all this time? Just show your hand. And they don’t have anything because we haven’t done anything wrong. We were law abiding. We were a good corporate citizen. And they knew that the time they came here to do this. They just wanted to take us down.

Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom (C) launches his new file sharing site "Mega", with dancers, in Auckland January 20, 2013. (Reuters/Nigel Marple)

'I want to reestablish a balance between a person and the state'

RT :The new program, Mega, is fully encrypted, and you’re touting it as an encrypted program so that people will want to use it. Do you think this is even necessary, right now, that people need encryption on the Internet?
KD: I think it’s important for the Internet that there is more encryption. Because what I have learned since I got dragged into this case is a lot about privacy abuses, about the government spying on people. You know, the US government invests a lot of money in spy clouds: massive data centers with hundreds of thousands of hard drives storing data. And what they are storing is basically any communication that traverses through US networks. And what that means they are not spying on individuals based on a warrant anymore. They just spy on everybody, permanently, all the time. And what that means for you and for anybody is that if you are ever a target of any kind of investigation, or someone has a political agenda against you, or a prosecutor doesn’t like you, or the police wants to interpret something in a way to get you in trouble — they can use all that data, go through it with a comb and find things even though we think we have nothing to hide and have done nothing wrong. They will find something that they can nail you with and that’s why it’s wrong to have these kinds of privacy abuses, and I decided to create a solution that overtime will encrypt more and more of the internet. So we start with files, we will then move to emails, and then move to Voice-Over-IP communication. And our API [Application Programming Interface] is available to any third-party developer to also create their own tools. And my goal is, within the next five years, I want to encrypt half of the Internet. Just reestablish a balance between a person — an individual — and the state. Because right now, we are living very close to this vision of George Orwell and I think it’s not the right way. It’s the wrong path that the government is on, thinking that they can spy on everybody.

Actors in police costume mock-arrest Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom (C), as he launches his new file sharing site "Mega" in Auckland January 20, 2013. (Reuters/Nigel Marple)

RT: Long before Megaupload was ever taken down, the Justice Department was looking into Ninja Video and you actually cooperated with them. People want to know: how is Kim Dotcom, this guy who is incredibly against Washington and hates everything that they’ve done to him, how is this same guy also helping out the Justice Department?
KD: Let me explain to you how this worked, okay? I was a good corporate citizen. My company was abiding to the laws. If we get a search warrant or we get a request by the government to assist in an investigation, we will comply and we have always complied. And that is the right thing to do, because if someone uploads child pornography or someone uploads terrorist stuff or anything that is a serious crime, of course we are there to help. This is our obligation. And I am not for copyright infringement. People need to understand that. I’m against copyright infringement. But I’m also against copyright extremism. And I’m against a business model: the one from Hollywood that encourages piracy. Megaupload is not responsible for the piracy problem, you see? It’s the Hollywood studios that release a movie in the US, and then six months later in other parts of the world. And everyone knows that the movie is out there and fans of a particular actress want to have it right now, but they are not giving them any opportunity to get access to that content even though they are willing to pay. And they are looking for alternatives on the Internet, and then they find them. They are trying to make me responsible for their lack of ability to adapt to a new reality, which is the Internet, where everything happens now. It doesn’t happen three months later. Imagine you go to Wikipedia. You want to find something, research an article, and they tell you to come back in three months, ‘We’ll give it to you then.’ If you find another site where you can get it right now, that’s where you go, right? So it’s really their business model that is responsible for this issue. And if they don’t adopt, they will be left behind on this side of the road of history like many others who haven’t adopted in the past.

Photo by Andrew Blake

'I’m not Aaron Swartz. Aaron Swartz is my hero. He was selfless'

RT: What about your skeptics who point out this big playboy lifestyle and this giant, elaborate house and say ‘He’s not worried about Internet freedoms, he’s just worried about protecting his profits’?
KD: Let me be clear: I am a businessman, okay? I started Megaupload as a business to make money. I wanted to list the company. I am an entrepreneur, alright? I’m not Aaron Swartz. Aaron Swartz is my hero. He was selfless. He is completely the opposite of me, but I’m a businessman. I’m driven by the success of achieving something in the business world. That’s not a crime. There is nothing wrong with that. And if you create something that is popular and that people want to use, you automatically make money. And I’ve always been an innovator. I’ve always created products that people like. And that’s why I’m successful. I’m not successful because people have used Megaupload for copyright infringement. And what everyone needs to understand [is] there have been massive amounts of legitimate users on Megaupload. We don’t believe that 50 million users a day are all just transferring piracy. That’s wrong. A lot of people have used it to back up their data, to send a file quickly to a friend. Young artists have used it to get traction, to get downloads, to get known. There was a lot of legitimate use on Megaupload. It’s a dual-use technology, just like the Internet. You can go to any ISP right now, anyone who connects customers to the Internet. And if they are honest to you and you ask them the question ‘How much of your traffic is peer-to-peer piracy?’ anyone who will tell you less than 50 percent is lying to your face. This is a problem of the Internet and not Megaupload.
RT: If you weren’t doing Mega, or Megaupload, what would you be doing? Here’s this businessman who strives to accomplish success. What would you be doing?
KD: I would probably build spaceships and we would probably already be on Mars.

Photo by Andrew Blake

RT: What happens next, though? What are the chances of Mega being shut down. We already saw that radio stations were pulling ads.
KD: The content industry is still very emotional about us.We bought radio ads with one of the major networks here for eight radio stations. Very funny, very cool ads, promoting our service as a privacy service. And the labels called up the radio station, and one advertiser who is in the movie business called up the radio station, and demanded those adds to be taken down or else they will not buy ads from them anymore. And they were forced because they rely, of course, on that advertisement. My campaign was comparably small to the amount that they are sending. So they used their power to interfere in our right to have a media campaign, an ad campaign. And that just shows you that attitude. It’s against the law. They can’t do that. That’s interfering in our business and they have done that many times in the past. Calling payment processors, calling advertisers, telling them, ‘I don’t want you to work with these guys.’ That’s just wrong. If you have an issue with us, go hire a lawyer, sue us, take us to court and then see if you have anything that will give you a judgment against us. But instead, they use that power and their money to get new laws made for them, to lobby politicians, to get the White House to come here and destroy our lives. Destroy 220 jobs. Hardworking innocent people and they don’t give a damn about that. They had an agenda that is about more control over the Internet. And they made a strategic decision to say ‘Who are we going to take out to send a strong message?’ And I was the one.

Photo by Andrew Blake

"If they come to attack us, it’s just going to backfire"

RT: But what happens if Mega is shut down? You are only on day one right now. How long is it going to take before the government steps up again and what are you going to do if that happens? Are you prepared to just start all over again? It’s been one year and here you are, doing this over again, what happens when Uncle Sam puts his foot down and grinds you into the dirt again? Do you get back up?
KD: Here is the thing. This startup is probably the most scrutinized when it comes to legal advice. Every single aspect of it has been under the looking glass by our legal team. So we are confident that it’s fully compliant with the law, and if they come to attack us it’s just going to backfire. Exactly like the Megaupload case did. The shutdown of our site backfired already, massively. And it’s just going to get worse for them. If they think they can pursue this and get away with this, they are dead wrong. Because the society is not on their side. Everyone who uses the Internet knows what’s going on here. They don’t like what’s going on here. They saw it with SOPA and you will see it with our case. People will come together and fight this kind of aggression against innovation and Internet freedom.

Photo by Andrew Blake

"We are all the little puppets that they think they can kick around"

RT: After Megaupload was shut down by the FBI last year, hacktivist with the movement Anonymous retaliated, so to speak. In response, they went and took down the websites for the FBI, the Motion Picture Association of America, the Department of Justice, the Recording Industry Association of America. All of these organizations were shut down by Anonymous in response to what they did to you. These were people who you never met but were so moved by what happened that they had to stand up and do something. Did you ever thank them, and how did you take it? How did you respond to their reaction?
KD: It’s a kind of virtual protest, you know? I think it’s not a good idea to shut down websites. I’ve been a hacker myself. I understand why they are doing it and how they are doing it, but I think there are better ways to protest. Where you organize yourself in a group and do petitions and actually email congressmen, email your local politicians, let them know about what you don’t like. Organize your movement rather than attacking. I had a sense of understanding for them because everyone had stored so much data on Megaupload, and then all of a sudden a site like that disappears and billions of files are taken offline, the majority of them perfectly legitimate. You need to understand one thing: 50 percent of all files that were ever uploaded to Megaupload have not even been downloaded once. That clearly shows the non-infringing use. People just wanted to store their stuff on our site. And of course they were outraged when that disappeared and the government said, ‘We don’t give a care and we don’t give a damn about you people. We don’t care that you have your personal documents there because we have our agenda and we are going to take over the Internet.’ And you know the White House was supporting SOPA, and only when the masses came together — and Aaron Swartz: he stopped SOPA. With his efforts, he stopped SOPA. And he became a target. A political target, okay? And that’s why all these things happened to him. There is no reasonable cause behind going after a young genius like that in the fashion they did. It’s political. Because the White House wanted SOPA. They promised it to Hollywood and they failed and they couldn’t go ahead because the White House was afraid if they keep pushing hard and they keep pushing it forward, that the people who oppose it are not going to vote for Obama in the reelection campaign. So it’s all a game to them really and we are all the little puppets that they think they can kick around. So we need to organize. There needs to be a movement that identifies these things and fights that. Not with shutting down websites but with real protests. Going out on the streets, writing to politicians and especially, most importantly, don’t vote for the guys that are against Internet freedom. Anyone who voted for SOPA, you should have a close look at that guy. Do I want to give him my vote next time around? Because that’s the only language politicians understand is your vote. And if you can bring all these votes together, somehow pooled for Internet freedom, you will see all these efforts disappear. Because at the end of the day, they represent the public. Politicians represent the public. And when they have enough pressure they can’t move forward. And SOPA was the best example for that.

Violence and Prescription Drugs: The Apparent Connection

http://usahitman.com/vapdtac/

Catherine J. Frompovich, Contributor
Activist Post As a consumer healthcare researcher for more than 35 years, I constantly am searching for information and data to substantiate what makes people sick and ‘tick’. In that capacity, I receive a tremendous amount of information via networking with individuals around the globe. We share information on a daily basis, as we believe people ought to know facts about their health and how to preserve and maintain it, plus what deliberately interferes with that God-given right of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as guaranteed citizens of these United States of America.
The recent unfortunate school shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, placed a spotlight on gun violence—rightfully so. However, what seems to be missing in the equation to reduce gun violence in the USA—at least—is something that I, as a concerned citizen, healthcare researcher and pacifist, think needs to be spotlighted. It’s the inordinate use of psychotropic drugs in younger children, which may have impact upon their behavior. Negative side effects while taking psychotropic drugs are not anomalies, as the following list apparently documents.
According to a website providing individual’s stories about adverse effects/events relating to SSRI medications called SSRI Stories, we find some rather thought-provoking information, especially regarding those stories noted “ **Indicates a school shooting or school incident.”
The SSRI Stories website lists hundreds, if not thousands, of stories about the horrors related to taking psychotropic drugs.
The list below starts in April of 1988 and goes through October 2011. As noted on the SSRI Stories website, the person who kept that log has passed away, so probably it’s not been kept current.
However, I find the stories listed below implicating ‘guilt by association’ since the perpetrators of school shootings and other violence apparently were taking what’s called psychotropic drugs.
Personally, I think society, the law, and government health agencies must evaluate all that goes into violent behavior, just not guns, knives, rope, automobiles, alcohol, etc.
According to the National Institutes of Mental Health website [1],

Recently, there has been some concern that the use of antidepressant medications themselves may induce suicidal behavior in youths. Following a thorough and comprehensive review of all the available published and unpublished controlled clinical trials of antidepressants in children and adolescents, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a public warning in October 2004 about an increased risk of suicidal thoughts or behavior (suicidality) in children and adolescents treated with SSRI antidepressant medications. In 2006, an advisory committee to the FDA recommended that the agency extend the warning to include young adults up to age 25.

The warning also notes that children and adolescents taking SSRI medications should be closely monitored for any worsening in depression, emergence of suicidal thinking or behavior, or unusual changes in behavior, such as sleeplessness, agitation, or withdrawal from normal social situations.

Personally, I don’t think guns, knives, or whatever instrument is used to commit violence and crime have any input into the children’s behavior, as you can note from what I’ve underscored above. Truly, it seems to me that something additional was instrumental in the aberrant behavior that led children to commit horrible crimes and/or threats against others.
School Stand-Off Apr. 13, 1988 Idaho Zoloft antidepressant
School Shooting May 20, 1988 Illinois Anafranil Antidepressant
School Shooting Jan. 30, 1992 Michigan Prozac antidepressant
School Shooting Sep. 20, 1992 Texas Antidepressants
School Shooting Related July 23, 1993 Florida Luvox
School Shooting Oct. 12, 1995 South Carolina Zoloft Antidepressant
School Violence/Murder May 5, 1994 N.Y. Antidepressants
School Shooting May 21, 1998 Oregon Prozac antidepressant withdrawal
School Shooting Plot Dec. 1, 1998 Wisconsin Med for depression
School Shooting Threat Apr. 16, 1999 Idaho Antidepressant
School Shooting Apr. 20, 1999 Colorado Luvox & Zoloft Antidepressants
School Threats Oct. 19, 1999 Florida Prozac antidepressant
School Shooting Mar. 10, 2001 Pennsylvania Paxil
School Hostage Situation Apr. 15, 2001 Wash. Paxil & Effexor antidepressants
School Shooting Apr. 19, 2001 California Celexa & Effexor antidepressants
School Stabbings June 9, 2001 Japan Antidepressants
School Machete Attack Sept. 26, 2001 Penna. Med for depression
School Shooting Jan. 17, 2002 Virginia Antidepressant ?
School Shooting Threat May 31, 2003 Michigan Antidepressant
School Shooting Feb. 9, 2004 New York Paxil antidepressant
School Shooting Threat Oct. 19, 2004 N.J. Med for depression
School/Assault Feb. 15, 2006 Tennessee Zoloft antidepressant
School Shooting Mar. 24, 2005 Minnesota Prozac Antidepressant
School Shooting Aug. 30, 2006 North Carolina Celexa antidepressant
School Shooting Sept. 30, 2006 Colorado Antidepressant
School Hostage Situation Nov. 28, 2006 N.C. Antidepressant withdrawal
School Knife Attack Dec. 6, 2006 Indiana Med for depression
School Stabbing Dec. 4, 2006 Indiana Wellbutrin
School Shooting Apr. 18, 2007 Virginia Antidepressant questionable
School Threat Apr. 23, 2007 Mississippi Antidepressants
School Suspension July 28, 2007 Arkansas Lexapro antidepressant
School Shooting Oct. 12, 2007 Ohio Antidepressant withdrawal
School Shooting Nov. 11, 2007 Finland Antidepressant withdrawal
School Threat Jan. 25, 2008 Washington Prozac antidepressant
School Shooting Feb. 2, 2008 Illinois Prozac withdrawal
School Suicide/Lockdown Feb. 20, 2008 Idaho Med for depression
School Stabbing Feb. 28, 2008 Texas Med for depression
School Threat Mar. 20, 2008 Indiana Antidepressants
School Shooting Plot Aug. 28, 2008 Texas Med for depression withdrawal
School Shooting Mar. 13, 2009 Germany Med for depression
School Shooting Mar. 18, 2011 South Carolina Meds for depression & ADHD
School Hostage Situation Apr. 11, 2009 N.Y. Cymbalta antidepressant withdrawal
School/Assault Nov.4, 2009 California Antidepressant
School Shooting Threats Jan. 25, 2010 Virginia Celexa antidepressant
School Shooting Feb. 19, 2010 Finland SSRI drug
School Knifing/Murder Apr. 28, 2010 Mass. Medications for Depression & ADHD
School Incident/Bizarre Aug. 22, 2010 Australia Zoloft
School Hostage Situation Dec. 15, 2010 France Med for depression
School Massacre Plot Feb. 23, 2011 Virginia Prozac withdrawal Illinois
School Shooting July 11, 2011 Alabama Zoloft Antidepressant & ADHD med
School Stabbing Oct. 25, 2011 Washington Med for depression
For those interested in finding more information about SSRI drugs, you may want to check out this rather informative website, Anxiety Medication and Kids at Education.
Too many physicians are too quick, in my opinion, to prescribe SSRIs for kids. Recently I heard that physicians will be labeling more and more children as bipolar, which means more psychotropic drugs. Will there be more violent crimes committed by children who may not be responsible for their acts, as such acts are drug-induced—not gun or knife induced, as many would have the public believe? When on psychotropic drugs, kids can be compared to a person who may be chronically drunk because of how those drugs change personality traits.
In May of 2012 ABC News reported “Childhood Bipolar Boom: More Cases or Misdiagnoses?”
A 40-fold rise in bipolar disorder is being reported by physicians. Why so? My suggestion would be to reconsider all the neurotoxins and toxic chemicals found in vaccines that are being pumped into kids as soon as they exist the womb [Hepatitis B vaccine] with more vaccinations in multiple combinations at 2, 4 and 6 months! Doesn’t medicine realize that those chemicals and neurotoxins cross the blood brain barrier? Poisons were not meant to enter the brain. Isn’t that what the blood brain barrier is all about?
That’s why there’s the need for federal health agencies to stop kowtowing to Big Pharma and take a serious look at the ramifications of what chemicals do to the human brain, especially in infants, toddlers, and teens. Let’s examine every aspect of probable chemically-induced crime, and not pin the tail on just one donkey in this game of what actually may be a prelude to the taking away of 2nd Amendment rights for some apparent spurious reason. At least that’s how I assess it.
UPDATE: Here’s documentation that there’s more to the culture of violence in the USA than just guns. NBC News reported January 25, 2013 in a feature story, “Teen’s confession: Horror film inspired murder of mom, sister,” that 17-year-old Jake Evans admitted in a four page confession that he got the idea to shoot and kill his mother and sister after watching the remake of “Halloween” three times during that week! Another gun killing story apparently precipitated by entertainment. http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/25/16692073-teens-confession-horror-film-inspired-murder-of-mom-sister?lite
Reference:
[1] http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/child-and-adolescent-mental-health/antidepressant-medications-for-children-and-adolescents-information-for-parents-and-caregivers.shtml
Catherine J Frompovich (website) is a retired natural nutritionist who earned advanced degrees in Nutrition and Holistic Health Sciences, Certification in Orthomolecular Theory and Practice plus Paralegal Studies.
Her work has been published in national and airline magazines since the early 1980s. Catherine authored numerous books on health issues along with co-authoring papers and monographs with physicians, nurses, and holistic healthcare professionals. She has been a consumer healthcare researcher 35 years and counting.
Catherine’s latest book, A Cancer Answer, Holistic BREAST Cancer Management, A Guide to Effective & Non-Toxic Treatments, is available on Amazon.com and as a Kindle eBook.
Two of Catherine’s more recent books on Amazon.com are Our Chemical Lives And The Hijacking Of Our DNA, A Probe Into What’s Probably Making Us Sick (2009) and Lord, How Can I Make It Through Grieving My Loss, An Inspirational Guide Through the Grieving Process (2008).

 since  when  did  the   American  People  become the  enemy?  ...    & if it  comes ? ....than let it ! 

West Point Defines “Domestic Enemies” to Prepare Troops to Take On Americans

truther January 24, 2013 

Brandon Turbeville
AP

Soldiers and police in America take an oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. But knowing who is a domestic enemy of the Constitution can be confusing to a young grunt. So a West Point think tank decided to broadly define what a domestic enemy may look like to ensure soldiers follow orders when the time comes.

In a study recently published by the West Point Combating Terrorism Center entitled, “Challengers From The Sidelines: Understanding America’s Violent Far-Right,” Arie Perliger, the author of the study, attempts to present a picture of an America infested with dangerous “Right Wing” domestic terrorists lurking in the shadows and waiting to launch an attack on government establishments, agents, and minorities.
In the study, what Perliger defines as the “Far-Right” is actually a mixture of race hate groups with ordinary militias, anti-abortion activists, Libertarians/Anarchists, and “conspiracy theorists.” Perliger suggets that this “Far-Right” contingent is glued together by an identification with an “anti-federalist” ideology as well as a belief in a “New World Order.” According to Perliger, these groups are concerned with the “corrupted and tyrannical nature of the federal government and its apparent tendency to violate individuals’ civilian liberties and constitutional rights.”
Perliger, who is the director of terrorism studies at the West Point Combating Terrorism Center writes in the Introduction to the study that its purpose is to provide “a conceptual foundation for understanding different far-right groups and then presents the empirical analysis of violent incidents to identify those perpetrating attacks and their associated trends.”

For all the repetition of the terms “terrorism” and “violent” however, it is important to mention just how broad a definition has been assigned to this term in recent years. As Madison Ruppert of End the Lie writes in his article, “West Point study identifies ‘violent far-right’ with recognizing tyrannical, corrupt nature of government,” “It is worth noting that the federal government is quite tyrannical and corrupt with a federal judge ruled the government can claim the legal right to assassinate Americans without any charge or trial while never explaining the legal basis, engage in widespread illegal surveillance (which is dramatically increasing) and indefinitely detain Americans.”

Ruppert continues by stating, “If those aren’t violations of individuals’ civil liberties and constitutional rights, I don’t know what is.”
Yet, while Perliger defines three different branches of the “far-right” – racist/white supremacy movement, anti-federalist movement, and fundamentalist movement – the author lumps the three different branches into one, all while conveniently ignoring pertinent facts that might not back up his claims.
Perliger’s paper notably lacks mention of the fact that a great many “racist/white supremacy” organizations are themselves either partially or even entirely staffed by law enforcement agents of government intelligence. Likewise, Perliger entirely conflates race-based movements (also likely infiltrated and controlled by government agencies) with what he labels the “Christian Fundamentalist” movement. This, as Madison Ruppert points out, is described with a complete lack of understanding (intentional or otherwise) as to what “fundamentalism” actually is.

Yet, the “anti-federalist” movement (itself a variety of movements mixed together to provide an easier category for Perliger and his readers), is the most interesting when evaluating the West Point paper. According to Perliger, this “movement” is centered around a belief in a “New World Order,” and the recognition of the “corrupted and tyrannical nature of the federal government and its apparent tendency to violate individuals’ civilian liberties and constitutional rights.”

In this regard, Perliger writes,

The anti-federalist rationale is multifaceted, and includes the beliefs that the American political system and its proxies were hijacked by external forces interested in promoting a “New World Order” (NWO) in which the United States will be absorbed into the United Nations or another version of global government. They also espouse strong convictions regarding the federal government, believing it to be corrupt and tyrannical, with a natural tendency to intrude on individuals’ civil and constitutional rights. Finally, they support civil activism, individual freedoms, and self government. Extremists in the anti-federalist movement direct most their violence against the federal government and its proxies in law enforcement.

In further summarizing the “anti-federalist” viewpoint, Perliger writes,

The anti-federalist movement’s ideology is based on the idea that there is an urgent need to undermine the influence, legitimacy and practical sovereignty of the federal government and its proxy organizations. The groups comprising the movement suggest several rationales that seek to legitimize anti-federal sentiments. Some groups are driven by a strong conviction that the American political system and its proxies were hijacked by external forces interested in promoting a “New World Order,” (NWO) in which the United States will be embedded in the UN or another version of global government. The NWO will be advanced, they believe, via steady transition of powers from local to federal law-enforcement agencies, i.e., the transformation of local police and law-enforcement agencies into a federally controlled “National Police” agency that will in turn merge with a “Multi-National Peace Keeping Force.” The latter deployment on US soil will be justified via a domestic campaign implemented by interested parties that will emphasize American society’s deficiencies and US government incompetency. This will convince the American people that restoring stability and order inevitably demands the use of international forces. The last stage, according to most NWO narratives, involves the transformation of the United States government into an international/world government and the execution and oppression of those opposing this process.

Indeed, anyone even faintly aware of historical and current events would be hard-pressed to argue with the so-called “anti-federalists” in their analysis.

Regardless, in light of the recent push for citizen disarmament, the paper tellingly states,

Linda Thompson, the head of the Unorganized Militia of the United States details the consequence of this global coup: ”This is the coming of the New World Order. A one-world government, where, in order to put the new government in place, we must all be disarmed first. To do that, the government is deliberately creating schisms in our society, funding both the anti-abortion/pro-choice sides, the antigun/pro-gun issues…trying to provoke a riot that will allow martial law to be implemented and all weapons seized, while ‘dissidents’ are put safely away”. The fear of the materialization of the NWO makes most militias not merely hostile towards the federal government but also hostile towards international organizations, whether non-profitable NGOs, international corporations, or political institutions of the international community, such as the UN.

Perliger, of course, does not attempt to challenge any of Thompson’s claims as they are presented in this short quotation nor does he attempt to debunk any of the claims made by the “anti-federalist” communities that he so concisely repeats in the statement above. While, admittedly, it is not a stated goal of the author’s study to defend his position and debunk those of his subjects, one would also be justified in concluding that Perliger does not attempt to defend his case simply because disproving the claims made by the “anti-federalist” activists as he presents them would impossible for him to do in a convincing manner.

Yet the purpose of the paper is not to provide legitimate information about these groups as much as it is to terrify the reader – West Point and other military trainees – into believing that anyone who rightly supposes that their government is overstepping its bounds, violating their rights, or moving forward in otherwise unconstitutional directions is a conspiracy-obsessed, right-wing, racist fanatic who is intent on killing military, police, and minorities.

Unfortunately for the author, however, a careful reading of his own argument causes it to fall apart at the seams.
After postulating numerous reasons for the alleged violence of “far-right” groups ranging from political, socio-economic, geographical, and operational possibilities, Perliger attempts to turn to the actual numbers.
At first, Perliger’s presentation of thousands of violent attacks per year (using 2010 statistics) is quite shocking since such attacks are not known to the general public and the mainstream media has not seized upon them at every available opportunity as one would expect. The actual level of violence in its own right, whether reported or not, would be concerning to say the very least.
These numbers would be an even more concerning situation if they demonstrated that such attacks were on the rise.
Unfortunately for the government argument, however, this is not the case as even Perliger has to admit when he says, “Hence, in periods during which many streams of terrorism have shown improvement in their operational capabilities and, as a result, an increase in their tendency to engage in mass casualty attacks, the violent American far right shows stagnation, at least in terms of its ability to enhance the harm it generates.”
For instance, while the term “right-wing violent attack” might conjure images of lynchings, executions, or mass terror attacks, the statistics, even those presented by Perliger, tend to show a different reality. Indeed, the type of “attack” referenced in Perliger’s study is entirely unclear in terms of just what would constitute a “right-wing violent attack.”
Indeed, when examining Perliger’s statistics, one can easily see that well over half of the “attacks” being described are actually proxy “attacks” (loosely defined term) against property, “foiled attacks” (which are wildly undefined, especially since the overwhelming majority of any foiled terrorist attack in the United States has been directed by the FBI), “heavy damage to property,” and “cross burnings.”
Likewise, with so many acts of property damage and racial symbols being later determined to have been directed by the “victims” themselves, one must also call these numbers into question since they are left unclear in the study.
Of those attacks designed to cause “mass casualties,” the Oklahoma City Bombing was no doubt included in the statistics, an obvious government-run false flag operation.

Yet, even among the 42% of “attacks” described as involving “specific human targets,” the incidents are not necessarily connected with any political, racial, or religious origin. As with any attempt at methods of divide and conquer, there is the very real possibility that any violent attack leveled against any individual of minority status or non-right-wing political ideology is thus considered to be a “specific human target” attack. Under such loosely defined rules of categorization, since the incidence of “specific human targets” were overwhelmingly one on one or (at most) two on one altercations, a simple shoving match between two individuals in which one could be remotely considered right wing, racist, or religious could then be delineated as a violent right-wing attack.

Since Perliger easily allows his own political bias to appear during the course of the paper and, since much of his political theory is based upon Israeli political scientist Ehud Sprinzak’s Iceberg model of the structure of political movements, it is apparent that Perliger’s own methodology is likely devised in a manner that would allow even the most distant and unrelated events seem directly related to the core of political ideology Perliger has set in his sites.
Such a concern is only compounded by the fact that one of Perliger’s main sources for his paper is the Southern Poverty Law Center, a notorious race-baiting organization that routinely accuses anyone who disagrees with the company line in regards to government policy as racist and potentially violent and dangerous. Not far behind, of course, is the citation of the Anti-Defamation League, an organization of similar race-based incredibility.
In the end, Perliger’s report is nothing more than just another cog in the wheel of a military-industrial complex on overdrive in its attempt to brainwash new military recruits into believing that a terrorist lurks behind every bush. More importantly, these new recruits are being trained that such terrorists are no longer shadowy Muslims hiding in caves in Afghanistan, but good ol’ boys, gun owners, and average American citizens that will eventually have to be dealt with.
                  

Infographic: Using Cell Phone Parts for Survival

truther January 23, 2013        http://www.pakalertpress.com/2013/01/23/infographic-using-cell-phone-parts-for-survival/

Cell phones today are capable of amazing things. You can talk, text, tweet, browse, shop, or buy form anywhere in the world. But did you know your phone can become pretty handy in a stone age survival situation as well

Google reports record requests for private info

Get short URL

email story to a friend print version

Published: 24 January, 2013, 14:10

http://rt.com/news/google-information-requests-report-625/

Reuters/Beck Diefenbach

Google received a record number of requests to disclose user information to governments and law enforcement bodies in 2012. Requests have rocketed by 25 per cent in the last year, with the US leading the field by far in calls for data disclosure.
The search giant published its findings in its annual transparency report, detailing the number of requests for user information by country. Since Google began documenting figures in 2009, there has been an increase of over 70 per cent in disclosure requests. The company says it has complied with 66 per cent of recent cases.
National governments and law enforcement agencies made 42,327 requests for personal data in 2012, a drastic increase from the 34,001 requests in 2011.
The US comprised the most submissions for private information, with over 8,438 requests in the latter half of 2012, a large portion of which were made through subpoenas. Google granted 88 per cent of these requests, the lowest since the search giant began reporting the figures.
None of the other countries in the report even came close the US total, but India came in second, reporting a total of 2,431 in the latter half of 2012, followed by 1,693 from France.
The UK also saw a significant number of requests, 70 per cent of which were granted by the company in 2012.
Google said that it could not specify as to the details of the case, but they did say “the statistics primarily cover requests in criminal matters.”
“In some instances the same Gmail account may be specified in several different requests for user data,” wrote Google in the report. Google also noted the statistics where not a hundred percent accurate because the company can comply with a request sometime after it was lodged.
­

Private data, not a ‘treasure trove’

UK-based rights group Privacy International said that the report showed that “Google, Facebook and Twitter are highly vulnerable to government intrusion.”
"The alarming statistics in this latest Transparency Report serve as a reminder of the need for stronger national and regional privacy protections in relation to online communications,” said Carla Nyst, head of International Advocacy in a statement.
She went to say that the personal information held by Google “paints a detailed picture of who we are – from our political and religious views to our friendships, associations and locations.”
With this in mind, the government needs to stop treating Google and other similar companies as “treasure troves,” often bypassing judicial authority, concluded Nyst.
­

EU double standard?

In spite of the growing quantity of data requests from governments, the EU is moving to put in place more controls on the information Facebook and Google can share without users’ consent.
Last week a German MEP proposed modifications to the 1995 Data Protection Act that would restrict the personal data that Google and Facebook can sell without a user’s consent.
"Users must be informed about what happens with their data," said Jan Philipp Albrecht, a German Green Party MEP. "And they must be able to consciously agree to data processing  or reject it."
Google and Facebook have protested such modifications to EU legislation, claiming they will impede innovation and damage business in the region.

The U.S. Has An Even Larger Gap Between The Rich And The Poor Than Downton Abbey Does

By Michael, on January 25th, 2013

 

There are two very different Americas today.  In one, the stock market is soaring, high end homes are selling briskly, big banks and hedge funds are rolling in money as if the last financial crisis never even happened, and life is really, really good.  In the other America, good jobs are incredibly scarce, incomes are declining, and poverty is skyrocketing to levels that we have never seen before.  The gap between the wealthy and the poor in America is getting wider with each passing day.  In fact, it is my contention that the U.S. has an even larger gap between the rich and the poor than Downton Abbey does.  If you have never seen Downton Abbey, you really should.  It is one of the most extraordinary shows to appear on television in years.  It is a drama set in the UK which follows the lives of the aristocratic Crawley family and their servants throughout the early part of the 20th Century.  It can be a bit jarring to watch servants wait on their masters hand and foot and refer to them by such titles as "Lord" and "Lady", but the truth is that in many ways there is more inequality today than there was back then.  As far as people living in the worst areas of cities such as Detroit and Cleveland are concerned, the socialites that live on Fifth Avenue in New York City or in multi-million dollar homes out in the Hamptons might as well be from another planet.  If you have lots of money, America is still a really great place to live.  If you barely have any money, America can be really cold and cruel.  Sadly, our politicians continue to pursue policies that make things even better for those working for the establishment in places such as Washington D.C. and Manhattan, and worse for all the rest of us.  This has especially been true over the course of the past four years.  If nothing is done, the gaping chasm between the rich and the poor will continue to get even worse, and in the end that will have some really severe consequences for our society.
So is the answer to raise taxes and "redistribute" more money to the poor?  Of course not.  Today, we are already paying dozens of different kinds of taxes every year and the government is handing out more money to people than ever before.  But poverty just continues to explode.
What the poor in the U.S. desperately need are good jobs, but we continue to ship millions of good jobs out of the country and Barack Obama continues to pursue policies that are killing the U.S. economy.
There is not much help on the horizon for the poor or the middle class in America, and that should be distressing for all of us.
But things in the wealthy parts of America are going absolutely wonderfully right now.  Let's take a few moments and contrast what life is like in the two Americas right now...
In the "good America", stocks are absolutely soaring.  In fact, the S&P 500 closed above 1,500 on Friday for the very first time in more than five years.
In the "bad America", poverty statistics just continue to get worse.  According to a newly released report, 60 percent of all children in the city of Detroit are living in poverty.
In the "good America", hedge funds are rolling in the profits.  The Dow just had its best January since January of 1994, and many analysts are projecting that 2013 will be a banner year for the markets.
In the "bad America", median household income has fallen for four years in a row, and millions of families are really struggling to find a way to pay the bills each month.
In the "good America", expensive homes are selling at a pace that we have not seen in years.  Just check out what is happening in the Hamptons.  According to the National Association of Realtors, sales of homes worth at least a million dollars were 51 percent higher in November 2012 than they were in November 2011.
In the "bad America", there are hordes of young adults that cannot find jobs and cannot take care of themselves.  Shockingly, U.S. families that have a head of household that is under the age of 30 have a poverty rate of 37 percent.
In the "good America", the "too big to fail" banks are partying like it was 2005 again.  For example, revenues at Goldman Sachs increased by about 30 percent in 2012 and Goldman stock has soared by more than 40 percent over the past 12 months.
In the "bad America", poverty is exploding and government dependence has become a way of life.  If you can believe it, the number of Americans on food stamps has grown from about 17 million in the year 2000 to more than 47 million today.
In the "good America", those working for the establishment will do just about anything to make a buck.  For instance, Goldman Sachs made 400 million dollars driving up food prices in 2012 while hundreds of millions around the world existed on the edge of starvation.
In the "bad America", millions of families are wondering how they will make it until next month.  If you can believe it, more than a million public school students in the United States are homeless.  This is the first time that has ever happened in our history.
In the "good America", everyone has a good ride.  In fact, sales of luxury German-made vehicles set new all-time records in 2012.
In the "bad America", those that have lost everything are shunned and ostracized.  In fact, many communities all over America are actually making feeding the homeless illegal.
The fact that there is poverty in America should not alarm you.  Every country in the world has poverty.  What should alarm you is how rapidly it is growing.  Even though the Obama administration tells us that we are in an "economic recovery", things just continue to get worse.  The wealthy elitists in Washington D.C. and New York City may be doing wonderfully, but the truth is that the middle class continues to shrink and just about every poverty statistic that you can think of continues to rise.
If you are convinced that we do not have a "wealth gap" problem in the United States today, just check out the following statistics.  Most of them are from one of my previous articles entitled "The Middle Class In America Is Being Wiped Out – Here Are 60 Facts That Prove It"...
-According to the Economic Policy Institute, the wealthiest one percent of all Americans households on average have 288 times the amount of wealth that the average middle class American family does.
-In the United States today, the wealthiest one percent of all Americans have a greater net worth than the bottom 90 percent combined.
-According to Forbes, the 400 wealthiest Americans have more wealth than the bottom 150 million Americans combined.
-The six heirs of Wal-Mart founder Sam Walton have as much wealth as the bottom one-third of all Americans combined.
-At this point, the poorest 50 percent of all Americans collectively own just 2.5% of all the wealth in the United States.
-The United States now ranks 93rd in the world in income inequality.
-The average CEO now makes approximately 350 times as much as the average American worker makes.
-Today, corporate profits as a percentage of U.S. GDP are at an all-time high, but wages as a percentage of U.S. GDP are near an all-time low.
Sometimes, when the "good America" and the "bad America" collide, the results are quite humorous.
For example, a 23-year-old homeless Brazilian man and his friends recently decided to "move in" to a 7,522 square foot house down in Florida that is valued at $2.1 million.  The following is from a recent article in the Orlando Sentinel...

Bank of America has filed to evict nine squatters from a $2.5-million mansion in a posh Boca Raton neighborhood.
In a filing in Palm Beach County court that names 23-year-old Andre De Palma Barbosa and eight other unknown people, the bank claims rightful ownership of the home – despite Barbosa's attempt to stake his claim on the foreclosed waterside property by using an obscure Florida real estate law.
Barbosa has been invoking a state law called "adverse possession," which allows someone to move into a property and claim the title – if they can stay there seven years.
A signed copy of that note is also posted in the home's front window.

Yeah, they will be able to get him and his friends out of there eventually, but in future years I fear that the conflicts between the rich and the poor will not be so nice.
Already, a very ominous "Robin Hood mentality" is building among the poor in this country.  Many wealthy people don't even realize that it is happening.  But someday when desperate "flash mobs" are roaming through their neighborhoods looking to do a little "creative redistribution", then they will get it.
Our society is starting to come apart at the seams, and there is an incredible amount of tension between the rich and the poor.  This is unfortunate, but instead of calming things down many of our politicians are actually exploiting this tension.
When our economy crashes, the class warfare of today may actually turn into real war in the streets.  Desperate people do desperate things, and when people are hungry and they can't feed their families, many of them will not be afraid to go over to the wealthy neighborhoods and take what they want.
A lot of people don't want to see them, but dark clouds are building.  According to a recent Gallup poll, Americans are more negative about where America will be five years from now than they have ever been before.  Most people know that we are on the edge of something really bad, even if they can't really explain it.
It is time to get ready for what is coming.  Even though the stock market is soaring right now, that could change at any moment.  All of the long-term economic and societal trends are pointing to some really bad things in the years ahead, and sticking our heads in the sand and pretending that everything is going to be okay somehow is not going to help.
So what do you think about all of this?
Do you think that the U.S. has an even larger gap between the rich and the poor than Downton Abbey does?
Please feel free to post a comment with your thoughts below...

Be Sociable, Share!

hehe   dumb  mother fucker, :0  ..with all due  respect ? haha    ..but even so folks ,they can show their face ! hehehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhe  ...   um telling u folks,hahahaaahahaa    ...a demon turned 2 me  & said     what  the fuck!     hahahahahhahahahaaha   after my last  remarks  about  Nazipollosee &   demon-ess  feinkenstein ,  &  her holy nuts  haginton &  her dummy .er hubby .......  The   SHIT Under  the Trailer Park  Ass-so she  A -tion ..........is Picketing   my house ?  &  the mob is becoming unruly  heheehhehe  ..they banned my gun,took my favorite fucking hammer ,any thin pointy ,blunt ,stick, knives ,forks & spoons ,pens.pencils,paperclips,    they  took my stapler man ! .....& fuck  i am have an hard time grabbing anything .....with these fucking mittens on :o ,,   But  thank God ,i got my helmet :)  ....it could  b worse ..i guess  :o  .......but  i hide my  chainsaw  heheheheheheheehehhee        

Piers Morgan Falls Ill Days After Public Flu Shot with Dr. Oz

Just two days after it was reported that GlaxoSmithKline’s Pandemrix H1N1 swine flu vaccine has actually caused a whopping 800 cases of narcolepsy in children according to Reuters, a major publicity stunt for the efficacy of the flu shot as presented by CNN has crashed and burned. After receiving his very first flu shot live on air from vaccine advocate Dr. Oz in attempt to showcase the ‘safety and effectiveness of the shot’, Piers Morgan has now developed flu-like symptoms that even he and his guest have attributed to the reception of the shot.
In the January 23 interview with country music celebrity Dwight Yoakam, Piers and Dwight discuss the connection between the recent shot and his new sickness. In the interview, which can be seen below, Piers asks “…As you can tell, things are deteriorating. Is there any advice you can give me?”
Yoakam replies with a simple “Don’t ever take a flu shot again,” sparking further discussion surrounding the public injection that ultimately turned into a PR nightmare for Big Pharma. In a surprising reply, Piers says ““We’re both doing the math, so I mean, we both saw him put that thing in my arm and within 10 days I’m struck down.” It was Piers’ first flu shot in his life, according to his own testimony.
You can watch this segment below:

As pointed out by Adan Salazar, the sickness is also highly ironic as Piers actually questioned Dr. Oz about the so-called ‘myths’ surrounding the shot before it was administered. One such ‘myth’ was whether or not the shot could actually lead to the flu. In dialogue with Dr. Oz, Piers nervously asked:
“So the myth about these, and I’m told it’s a myth, is that you can actually get flu or flu-like symptoms simply by having the shot. Is that true?”
Dr. Oz, of course, regurgitated information provided by the CDC in stating that such an event is impossible due to the fact that the flu shot contains the dead flu virus. Dr. Oz also fails to mention that even the FDA’s own website admits that vaccines contain toxic additives like:
Antibiotics: Linked to the development of mental illness, obesity, and serious gut imbalance due to the depletion of beneficial bacteria in the gut, superbug-spawning antibiotics are used in vaccinations as an ‘additive’ as admitted by the FDA.
Formaldehyde: This of course is the known carcinogen used in the preservation of corpses by funeral homes and elsewhere. Even Cancer.gov admits that formaldehyde is a serious cancer-causing chemical, stating “Formaldehyde has been classified as a known human carcinogen (cancer-causing substance) by the International Agency for Research on Cancer…” So why is this cancer-causing substance being used an additive for vaccinations?
Aluminum: Popularly associated with Alzheimer’s disease and a bunch of other brain disorders, aluminum is used as a vaccine additive to ‘stimulate a response’ from the body.
Thimerosal: One of the most widely known additives, thimerosal is a mercury-containing substance that is unsafe at any dose. Your doctor is likely entirely misinformed on this additive, stating there is no mercury-containing thimerosal in a vaccine when even the FDA and CDC plainly state this. As stated by Dr. David Wallinga from the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, mercury is ‘toxic in all its forms.”
Instead of giving Piers a vaccination full of these toxic additives, Dr. Oz could have simply recommended that Piers begin supplementing with high quality, inexpensive vitamin D3 — or simply take a walk around outside in a warmer climate. Even in considerably low doses, vitamin D3 has been found to flash the risk of flu development by nearly half – a much great success rate than the flu shot.
About Anthony Gucciardi:        

Piers Morgan Says He Got A Flu Shot And Ten Days Later He's Sick!  http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=X5SQPPvR-JA

Google Plus Profile Anthony is an accomplished investigative journalist whose articles have appeared on top news sites and have been read by millions worldwide. Anthony's articles have been featured on top health & political websites such as Reuters, Yahoo News, MSNBC, and Bloomberg. Anthony is also a founding member of Natural Attitude, a leading developer of super high quality spagyric formulations.