Sunday, November 3, 2013

Britney Spears' "Work B*tch" and Iggy Azalea's "Change Your Life": Two Videos Celebrating Kitten Programming - The Vigilant Citizen - The Vigilant Citizen

Britney Spears' "Work B*tch" and Iggy Azalea's "Change Your Life": Two Videos Celebrating Kitten Programming - The Vigilant Citizen - The Vigilant Citizen

American Psychiatric Association Reclassifies Pedophilia, Backtracks

http://www.breitbart.com

The American Psychiatric Association’s (APA) decision to once again reclassify pedophilia has led to further concerns that the professional organization is attempting to legitimize the disorder, paving the way for its defense and the recommendation of removal of age-of-consent laws.

In a press release Friday, Liberty Counsel, a nonprofit organization that promotes the causes of religious liberty, the sanctity of human life, and the family observed that in its newly published Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), APA “changed the classification of pedophilia from a ‘disorder’ to a ‘sexual orientation,’ but, following the public outcry, APA released a statement that it was a mistake.”
APA, Liberty Counsel noted, now states “sexual orientation” is an error and should read instead, “sexual interest.”
On Thursday, APA released a statement regarding what it referred to as a “text error” in DSM-5:
In the case of pedophilic disorder, the diagnostic criteria essentially remained the same as in DSM-IV-TR. Only the disorder name was changed from “pedophilia” to “pedophilic disorder” to maintain consistency with the chapter’s other disorder listings.
“Sexual orientation” is not a term used in the diagnostic criteria for pedophilic disorder and its use in the DSM-5 text discussion is an error and should read “sexual interest.” In fact, APA considers pedophilic disorder a “paraphilia,” not a “sexual orientation.” This error will be corrected in the electronic version of DSM-5 and the next printing of the manual.
APA stands firmly behind efforts to criminally prosecute those who sexually abuse and exploit children and adolescents. We also support continued efforts to develop treatments for those with pedophilic disorder with the goal of preventing future acts of abuse.
Liberty Counsel cited APA’s statement upon the release of the original DSM-5 and the fact that the new publication “marked the end of more than a decade’s journey in revising the criteria for the diagnosis and classification of mental disorders.” APA said that the revision was done with collaboration from “professionals from the mental health and medical communities, patients and their families, and members of the public.”
“Clearly, if reclassifying pedophilia was merely an ‘error,’ it would have been caught in the ‘decade’s journey,’” said Mat Staver, Founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel. “Whether it is classified a ‘sexual orientation’ or a ‘sexual interest,’ any effort to legitimize pedophilia will provide pederasts with all the arguments they need to remove age of consent laws, and children will suffer.”
In its statement, Liberty Counsel noted the changes APA made to the diagnostic category of pedophilia over the years:
  • In DSM-III, APA said that one who acted upon one’s sexual attraction to children was a pedophile.
  • In DSM-IV, APA changed its criteria, stating that pedophilia was only a disorder if it “caused clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational or other important areas of functioning.”
  • The Rind study was published, finding that man-boy “consensual” relationships were not necessarily harmful.
  • Subsequent to the public outcry related to the Rind study, APA said moral values trumped the scientific study.
  • In the original printing of DSM-5, “pedophilia” was changed to a “sexual orientation,” but another public outcry led APA to admit an “error” that will be corrected in “the next printing of the manual.”
“The DSM-5 has been under consideration for ten years. It is hard to accept that its publication was a mistake or an error. It is more likely that the public outcry prompted the APA’s recent press statement,” said Liberty Counsel.
Staver said, “The APA has lost credibility with this recent blunder over the classification for pedophilia. The APA has become co-opted by a political agenda.”
“The implications of reclassifying natural law, whether it be for same-sex marriage or adult-children relationships, are far-reaching,” he concluded.
Interestingly, APA has also been severely criticized by Allen Frances, M.D., the psychiatrist who supervised the publication of DSM-IV. Though Frances may have himself contributed to the classification “controversies,” his primary criticism of DSM-5 has been that it creates even more mental health disorder categories, and, consequently, an environment in which an increased number of human behaviors are open to the potential of being declared deviant.
“It is a sure sign of excess that 25% of us reportedly qualify for a mental disorder and that 20% are on psychiatric medication,” Frances wrote in June. “Unless checked, DSM-5 will open the floodgates and may turn current diagnostic inflation into future hyperinflation.”
Frances’ concern with some diagnostic categories such as those in the arena of sexual deviance is that, put simply, they are “pseudo-diagnoses” and not true “mental disorders.”
“There is no infallible definition guiding what should, and what should not, be included in the official manual of mental disorders,” Frances wrote in 2010 in Psychiatric Times. APA’s provision of increasing numbers of these “pseudo-diagnoses” in the area of sexual deviance, he stated, “has already contributed significantly to a grave misuse of psychiatry by the legal system in the handling of sexually violent predators – a misuse much opposed by the APA in a task force report and amicus brief to the Supreme Court.”
Frances argued that such diagnostic constructs “also medicalize undesirable sexual behavior and thereby provide a psychiatric excuse helpful to those who are attempting to evade personal responsibility.”

US Attacks Germany’s Economic Policies. Washington Views with Growing Alarm the Emergence of Germany as the Economic Powerhouse of Europe

Region:

usempire
The report blasted Germany’s export-led growth strategy and said German policies were leading to deflation in the European and global economy. It declared, “Germany’s anemic pace of domestic demand growth and dependence on exports have hampered rebalancing at a time when many other euro-area countries have been under severe pressure to curb demand and compress imports in order to promote adjustment …
“Within the euro area, countries with large and persistent surpluses need to take action to boost domestic demand growth and shrink their surpluses. The net result has been a deflationary bias for the euro area, as well as for the world economy.”
The Treasury report added, “Germany has maintained a large current account surplus throughout the euro area financial crisis, and in 2012, Germany’s nominal current account surplus was larger than that of China.”
The Treasury department had previously focused its attention on calls for China to allow its currency to appreciate. The decision to prominently and aggressively criticize Germany’s economic policies marks a significant escalation of tensions between the two countries.
The German Finance Ministry fired back that its exports are “no cause for concern, neither for Germany, nor for the euro zone, or the global economy.” It added, “There are no imbalances in Germany that need correction. On the contrary, the innovative German economy contributes significantly to global growth through exports and the import of components for finished products.”
The growing international tensions between the US and Germany come amid an economic slump on both sides of the Atlantic, accompanied by a significant fall in inflation. The same day the Treasury Department released its report, the European Union’s statistics office reported that inflation in the euro area fell by 0.7 percent in October, the lowest level in four years, while the unemployment rate remained at a record high of 12.2 percent.
The US economy added 148,000 jobs in September, less than the number expected by economists, according to the latest jobs report by the Labor Department. So far, the second half of 2013 has averaged 143,000 new jobs per month, compared to an average of 195,000 for the first half of the year, pointing to an economic slowdown. Over the past twelve months, US consumer prices have risen only 1.2 percent, compared to the Federal Reserve’s nominal target of 2 percent.
In an editorial Friday, the New York Times responded enthusiastically to the broadside against Germany, praising the report for breaking from tradition “by offering some blunt and much-needed perspective about the German economy.”
“Germany, the biggest economy in the euro zone, has long been a major contributor to imbalances in the global economy,” the Times asserted. “It exports far more than it imports and does too little to encourage the growth of domestic demand.”
The Times lectured Germany about the need to expand domestic demand without mentioning that the US government that very day had slashed food stamp benefits for tens of millions of the poorest and most vulnerable members of society, and was preparing to cut off extended unemployment benefits at the end of the year.
“For starters,” the Times wrote, “the government can borrow and spend more to help boost investment. It could also cut taxes on lower-income Germans to increase consumer spending.”
The article added that Germany “could encourage more births by improving access to child care and providing other benefits.” Again, the Times evidently did not feel constrained by the virtual absence of child care benefits in the United States, or by cuts in the Head Start program as a result of the “sequester” budget cuts.
The escalation of tensions between Germany and the US is bound up with the deepening of the economic and financial crisis that began in 2008. Economic growth in Europe and the US remains negligible, while much of the developing world, including Asia, is experiencing a significant slowdown.
But even the low levels of growth are dependent on the vast amounts of cash being printed by the world’s central banks, led by the Federal Reserve. In recent years, significant differences have emerged between Germany on the one hand and the US, Britain, France and the International Monetary Fund on the other, with the latter favoring more stimulative monetary policies and Germany resisting such a course.
In the aftermath of the 2008 crisis, the watchword in capitalist government and banking circles was “global economic rebalancing.” But this was interpreted in diametrically opposite ways by deficit countries, led by the US, and surplus countries such as China and Germany. In the name of rebalancing, the US demanded that countries with large trade and current account surpluses rein in their exports and do more to increase domestic consumption—moves that would, not accidentally, favor US exporters. Germany, on the other hand, insisted that the key to rebalancing was for the US and other deficit countries to rein in their spending and cut their deficits and debt burdens.
Under conditions where the global economy remains depressed, with little prospect for improvement, countries are increasingly drawn into a competitive battle for control of stagnant or shrinking international markets. At the same time, Washington views with growing alarm the emergence of Germany as the economic powerhouse of Europe and the dominant voice in European economic policy.

Planetary Weapons and Military Weather Modification: Chemtrails, Atmospheric Geoengineering and Environmental Warfare


chemtrails
Developed in 1988 by the United Nations Environment Programme and the UN’s World Meteorological Organization, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) just published its Fifth Assessment Report [1] and maintains its silence on military weather modification applications which continue to skew the data.
“Extreme weather and climate events” are linked to climate change while no mention is made of government programs deliberately aimed at modifying the weather and inducing earthquakes, drought, rain, and tsunamis.
The modern weather modification program, at least in the US, is over 70 years old. Public service announcements printed in newspapers back in the 1960s warned of government intention to modify the weather.
Life Magazine, back in the 50s and 60s, continually covered US weather modification programs, including Project Stormfury which redirected and reduced hurricane intensity from 1962 to 1983. The IPCC’s continuing and absolute silence on such programs is deafening.
With insider knowledge, a chapter in the 1968 book, Unless Peace Comes: A Scientific Forecast of New Weapons, predicts the development of technologies that will use the planet itself as a weapon. The chapter, “How to Wreck the Environment,” [2] was penned by geophysicist and member of President Johnson’s Science Advisory Committee, Dr. Gordon J.F. MacDonald, wherein he states:
“The key to geophysical warfare is the identification of the environmental instabilities to which the addition of a small amount of energy would release vastly greater amounts of energy.”
The chapter envisions four planetary weapons which MacDonald predicted would be fully developed by the 21st century, based on the then-current state of research:
  • Climate modification;
  • Earthquake generation;
  • Tsunami generation and direction; and
  • Mass behavior control via electromagnetic manipulation of the ionosphere.
The idea is carried forward in several geoengineering schemes detailed in Eli Kintisch’s Hack the Planet, in a chapter entitled “The Pursuit of Levers,” explained as “small changes in Earth’s system that can have profound global effects.” [3]
As LBJ’s Science Advisor, MacDonald surely knew of the military’s weather modification program known as Operation Popeye, which ran from 1967 thru 1972 in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. By seeding clouds, the US military caused torrential downpours that inhibited enemy truck and troop movements. Initially exposed by investigative journalist Jack Anderson, the existence of the project was later corroborated in The Pentagon Papers.
In 1996, world renowned scientist Dr. Rosalie Bertell, who served on the Bhopal and the Chernobyl Medical Commissions, and was a recipient of the Right Livelihood Award, published “Background on HAARP,” [4] describing Dr. Bernard Eastlund’s brainchild, the US High Frequency Active Auroral Research Project, as follows:
“It would be rash to assume that HAARP is an isolated experiment which would not be expanded. It is related to fifty years of intensive and increasingly destructive programs to understand and control the upper atmosphere. It would be rash not to associate HAARP with the space laboratory construction which is separately being planned by the United States. HAARP is an integral part of a long history of space research and development of a deliberate military nature.”
In 2000, reports Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, Dr Bertell told The Times of London, “US military scientists … are working on weather systems as a potential weapon. The methods include the enhancing of storms and the diverting of vapor rivers in the Earth’s atmosphere to produce targeted droughts or floods.” [5]
HAARP’s use of the ionosphere through radio frequencies, explains Dr. Nick Begich, co-author of Angels Don’t Play This HAARP, also triggers earthquakes and volcanoes. [6] Begich quotes Clinton’s Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen, who said in 1997 at a conference on terrorism:
“Others are engaging even in an eco-type of terrorism whereby they can alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves.” [7]
Pragmatically, the US wouldn’t be worried about such weapons unless they knew with certainty that they were feasible and had, in all likelihood, already developed them itself.
In “Atmospheric Geoengineering: Weather Manipulation, Contrails and Chemtrails,” which was named the 9th most censored story in 2012 by Project Censored, a brief history of known geoengineering events was published. [8] From that report, the IPCC’s co-founder, the World Meteorological Organization, complained six years ago, in 2007, that:
“In recent years there has been a decline in the support for weather modification research, and a tendency to move directly into operational projects.” [9]
But the IPCC remains mum on these projects, except to deny they exist, while at the same time urging in its Summary that they must continue or global warming will spike. The 2013 IPCC report states:
“Theory, model studies and observations suggest that some Solar Radiation Management (SRM) methods, if practicable, could substantially offset a global temperature rise and partially offset some other impacts of global warming, but the compensation for the climate change caused by greenhouse gases would be imprecise (high confidence).” [emphasis in original]
To claim that solar radiation management methods (which include chemtrails and HAARP-induced changes) are “unimplemented and untested” is patently absurd, and contradicts a library of evidence.

Geoengineering Patents

On March 26, 2013, the US Patent and Trademark Office granted a patent to Rolls-Royce PLC to prevent contrails from forming. [10] By using an electromagnetic wave generator, contrails would not be visible, nor would artificial clouds develop.
It’s not the first such patent. Back in 1962 the US Air Force wanted to add caustic chemicals to hide contrails and prevent unintentional cirrus cloud formation. Patent No. 3,517,505 was granted eight years later, in 1970. Patent, No. 5,005,355, granted in 1988 to Scipar, Inc., used various species of alcohol, which effectively lowered the freezing point of water to avoid contrail formation. The 2013 patent characterized both of these earlier patents as environmentally inappropriate for commercial purposes.
For a partial list of patents for stratospheric aerial spraying programs from 1917 thru mid-2003, see Lori Kramer’s “Patently Obvious: A Partial History of Aerosol and Weather Related Technologies.” [11] Weather Warfare by Jerry Smith also includes an appendix of HAARP-related patents. [12]

A Note on Persistent Contrails

What some see as chemtrails, the IPCC and others recognize as persistent contrails that are a normal effect of today’s jet exhaust.
In the 2006 book, Weather Warfare, Jerry Smith explains that persistent contrails are not necessarily chemtrails. From the 1990s on, he explains, all jet engines were modified with a “high bypass turbofan” which increased fuel efficiency and, as a side effect, left persistent contrails that hazed into cirrus clouds after several hours. This is the timeframe when chemtrail sightings begin.
The reason today’s jets now form persistent contrails, explains Marshall Smith, a former NASA-Ames aeronautical engineer, is that the sooty particulates in older jet exhaust provided a nucleus around which ice crystals would form (giving us a contrail). But because of its dark color, the sooty particulate absorbed solar energy which melted the ice crystals, dissipating the contrail. Today’s cleaner and thus clearer jet exhaust allows solar energy to pass right through it, and so contrails persist and spread into high cirrus clouds lasting 24-36 hours.
Smith admits that this development does not disprove chemical, biological or metallic dispersants from jets, and he also states that such dispersants can be sprayed without leaving a chemtrail, depending on the particulate, and on the humidity and atmospheric temperature. But, later, in 2009, he published the following:
“‘Chemtrails’ theory then, is that ‘normal’ jet aircraft contrails disappear in a few minutes, whereas ‘chemtrails’ persist for hours, and therefore are not ‘normal’ and must contain some covert element to make them persist…. Persistent jet contrails can be entirely explained by science without having to resort to a ‘conspiracy theory’ scenario. They appear to be no more than the natural result of the introduction of the hi-bypass turbo fan, improved jet fuel (JP-8) and ‘global warming.’” [13]
The transition to more efficient jet fuel and cold-flow additives supports this explanation, but none of that can explain the following image, taken earlier this year in Raglan, New Zealand:
ragland AL 2013Nov3
The dot-dash effects seen in the sky, Smith explains, are the result of the jet exhaust passing thru sections in the atmosphere that are warmer, creating a broken line or dotted contrail. The following image makes that explanation implausible. Instead, it illustrates that as the plane passed, an on-off switch was thrown several times. It’s hardly likely the ambient temperature and humidity uniformly varied where the plane traveled.
chemdots
The IPCC specifically addressed the impact of global aviation on the atmosphere in a 2000 report, noting that aircraft were then responsible for up to a half a percent of all of Earth’s cirrus cloud coverage, and that cirrus clouds tend to warm the surface of the planet. [14]
Global distribution of net instantaneous radiative forcing at the top of atmosphere in daily and annual average for present (1992) climatic conditions, analyzed contrail cover, and 0.55-µm optical depth of 0.3 (Minnis et al., 1999).
However, the high-bypass turbo fan and better grade fuel do not explain the grid pattern often seen which is clearly not normal air traffic lanes. Below are two images showing the grid pattern. The first, a generic one found on the web , is one of many such images uploaded by concerned citizens who reasonably fail to recognize a normal set of flight lanes.
ChemtrailBAM
This next image is a satellite view looking down at the Celebes Sea, showing chemtrails and their shadows. (NASA)
Satellite view of Celebes Sea showing chemtrails and their shadows. (NASA)
Finally, the fine dusting of web-like filaments referred to as chemwebs can be explained by a natural arachnid phenomenon known as Gossamer Showers or Gossamer Filaments. Spiders are known to balloon, spreading their webs over the land for miles. Referred to throughout history, naturalist Henry Christopher McCook wrote about them in his 1890 book, American Spiders and Their Spinningwork. [15]
Unless lab results prove otherwise, these webs are natural and should remain outside the chemtrails discussion.

Impossible to Regulate?

Weather Warfare also spends a good deal of time covering the international agreements against environmental modification (ENMOD). The first major one came in 1978, after the US was exposed for weaponizing weather during the Vietnam War. Smith points out that none of these agreements cover “national defense” which is how governments are able to avoid the ban.
That 1978 agreement specifically objected to hostile use of ENMOD. In 2010, the UN banned friendly ENMOD. [16] The 193-member Convention on Biodiversity agreed by consensus to a moratorium on geoengineering projects and experiments, which governments promptly ignored. With no teeth to that moratorium, it’s not too surprising that such programs continue unabated.
Not two months later, in Cancun, Mexico, at the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the IPCC opened the 2010 conference by promoting geoengineering options. [17]
On a practical level, notes the International Risk Governance Council:
“Countries and firms routinely fly various aircraft in the stratosphere, or send rockets through the stratosphere into space. These activities release significant quantities of particles and gases. A requirement for formal prior approval of small field studies, just because they are directed at learning about SRM and its limitations, is probably unenforceable because judging intent is often impossible.” [18]
In Hack the Planet, Kintisch opposes an outright global ban on geoengineering, fearing that governments will simply go underground with it. This is bad, he stresses, because it will “worsen perceptions that [geoengineering is] a quasi-military strategy or a technocratic means of control.” Going further, he states:
“A vibrant community of conspiracy theorists is under the belief that geoengineering is already being deployed by governments by releasing so-called chemtrails in the sky.”
But de facto moratoria already exist for such projects, as mentioned above, and Kintisch lists some others, including the London Protocol, the London Convention and a German restriction limiting iron-seeding to coastal waters only. The only element missing in Kintisch’s reasoning is his refusal to believe that governments have already gone underground with it and that geoengineering is already underway.
Kintisch, like all government propagandists, wields the “conspiracy theorist” label like a club, without once offering any logical counter-argument to explain what thousands of sky watchers have observed and documented with photographs, videos, and soil and water tests.
Conspiracies are argued and decided by the thousands in courts all over the world, every day. Most crimes are not committed by lone actors, yet condemning those who recognize a conspiracy pattern has become a simple and lazy way to crush investigation into inconsistencies in government position statements. Bradley Manning, Edward Snowden and Wikileaks, along with Daniel Ellsberg, Karen Hudes and W. Mark Felt, certainly prove that governments are the most dangerous conspirators facing humanity today.
Though he offers dozens of reasons why geoengineering the planet would be a bad idea, Kintisch comes out in support of the notion, likening it to a terrarium, “an enclosed controlled garden,” leaving the reader with a sense that planet hacking is a necessary evil that should be regulated.

Modifying the Weather for Profit

In related news, the ecocidal giant, Monsanto, just dropped nearly a billion dollars to get into the weather insurance game, buying Climate Corporation. Forbes reports, “The idea is to sell more data and services to the farmers who already buy Monsanto’s seed and chemicals.” [19]
Already closely tied to the military, how easy would it be for Monsanto to know in advance of a geoengineered drought or deluge? Monsanto expects its climate insurance business to generate $20 billion in revenue beyond its seed and chemical business.
Likewise, how easy would it be for a nation with decades of experience in modifying the weather and in triggering geophysical events to create the problem of climate change (or exaggerate its significance) to induce the world into approving, even demanding, geoengineering? With decades of patents providing a history of capabilities, could this entire drama, including “extreme weather events” be orchestrated for the simple pursuit of profit?
Isn’t this precisely how the Hegelian Dialect works? Problem→Reaction→Solution (Thesis→Antithesis→Synthesis). In other words, those in a position of power invent a problem, anticipating the public’s reaction to it, and use that reaction to generate demand for the “solution” which was the intended program power-holders wanted to implement in the first place.
At the very least, while the veil may be lifting on geoengineering practices, there is still an apparent effort to conceal the extent to which the planet is already being engineered.
Notes:
[1] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, “Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis,” Sept. 2013 at http://www.climatechange2013.org/report/. The following link is to the Summary, downloaded Nov. 2, 2013 (in case the original Summary is modified in the future): http://abact.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/ipcc-policy-summary-2013.pdf
[2] Nigel Calder, Ed. Unless Peace Comes: A Scientific Forecast of New Weapons, Allen Lane Publishers, London, 1968. Cited chapter by Gordon J. F. MacDonald, ‘How to Wreck the Environment,’ available at http://coto2.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/1968-macdonald-how-to-wreck-the-planet.pdf
[3] Eli Kintisch, Hack the Planet: Science’s Best Hope or Worst Nightmare for Averting Climate Catastrophe. John Wiley & Sons. 2010.
[4] Sister Dr. Rosalie Bertell, “Background on HAARP,” 1996. Available at http://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/212/45492.html
[5] Michel Chossudovsky, “Washington’s New World Order Weapons Have the Ability to Trigger Climate Change,” 4 Jan. 2002. Available at http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO201A.html
[6] Nick Begich. Interview by Russell Scott, The West Coast Truth. “Angels Don’t Play This HAARP & Tesla Technology w/ Dr. Nick Begich ,” 22 Sept. 2012. Available at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33XGrXK6jnI
[7] William S. Cohen, “Terrorism, Weapons of Mass Destruction, and U.S. Strategy,” Sam Nunn Policy Forum, Conference on Terrorism. University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia. 28 April 1997. Speech. Available at http://www.fas.org/news/usa/1997/04/bmd970429d.htm
[8] Rady Ananda, “Atmospheric Geoengineering: Weather Manipulation, Contrails and Chemtrails,” Global Research, 30 July 2010. Available at http://www.globalresearch.ca/atmospheric-geoengineering-weather-manipulation-contrails-and-chemtrails/20369
[9] World Meteorological Organization, “Executive Summary of the WMO Statement on Weather Modification,” WMO Documents on Weather Modification Approved by the Commission for Atmospheric Sciences Management Group, Second Session, Oslo, Norway, 24-26 September 2007. CAS-MG2/Doc 4.4.1, Appendix C. Available at http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/arep/wwrp/new/documents/WM_statement_guidelines_approved.pdf
[10] Frank G Noppel, et al., (assigned to Rolls-Royce PLC). “Method and apparatus for suppressing aeroengine contrails.” Patent No. 8,402,736. 26 March 2013. Available at http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=8402736.PN.&OS=PN/8402736&RS=PN/8402736
[11] Lori Kramer, “Patently Obvious: A Partial History of Aerosol and Weather Related Technologies, n.d. Available at http://www.seektress.com/patlist.htm
[12] Jerry Smith, Weather Warfare: The Military’s Plan to Draft Mother Nature, Adventures Unlimited Press: 2006.
[13] Jerry Smith, “The Painful Truth About ‘Chemtrails,” Sovereign Mind Magazine: May/June 2009. Available at http://www.jerryesmith.com/index.php/156
[14] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, “Aviation and the Global Atmosphere,” November 2000. Available at http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/sres/aviation/
[15] Henry Christopher McCook, American Spiders and Their Spinningwork, Vol. II. Self-published, 1890. Available at Biodiversity Heritage Library, http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/search?searchTerm=mccook+spiders#/titles
[16] ETC Group, “BREAKING: UN Bans Chemtrails,” 28 Oct. 2010. Available at http://foodfreedom.wordpress.com/2010/10/28/un-votes-to-ban-chemtrails/
[17] Rady Ananda, “UN Climate Concern Morphs into Chemtrail Glee Club,” 6 Dec. 2010. Available at http://foodfreedom.wordpress.com/2010/12/06/un-climate-concern-morphs-into-chemtrail-glee-club/
[18] M. Granger Morgan and Katharine Ricke, “Cooling the Earth Through Solar Radiation Management: The need for research and an approach to its governance,” International Risk Governance Council, 2010. Available at http://www.irgc.org/IMG/pdf/SRM_Opinion_Piece_web.pdf
[19] Bruce Upbin, “Monsanto Buys Climate Corp for $930 Million,” 2 Oct. 2013. Available at http://www.forbes.com/sites/bruceupbin/2013/10/02/monsanto-buys-climate-corp-for-930-million/

U.S. intelligence agencies have their own Twitter, It’s called eChirp

Source: WashPost
The US’ intelligence agencies reportedly have their own private version of the microblogging site Twitter.
As Twitter is officially banned within most workplaces, for being a tricky ’140-character platform’, Pentagon and other intelligence officials have taken to a privately run, internal microblogging service called as eChirp, which appears to be a replica of the original site.

According to The Verge, eChirp was established in 2009, the original goal of the site was to let expert analysts across different agencies weigh in on breaking news without compromising any secure information.
However, a 2011 situation about Libyan unrest in which generals realized they could get more up-to-date information from Twitter than from their own analysts led to the White House provide access to a read-only reprint version of Twitter, making eChirp only secondary.
The report said that a password-protected subdomain on the US intelligence community’s Intelink intranet is labeled ‘Chirp’, suggesting it may be the main way authorized users access the eChirp service.

The internet’s teenage sexting ecosystem

A group of websites and apps is leaving underage internet users open to exploitation. Jeremy Wilson discovers that the companies behind this ecosystem aren’t interested in safeguarding their users.
heres-some-hard-data-on-how-much-college-students-are-actually-sexting-each-other
Sexting has come a long way in the last few years, from fuel for panicked tabloid speculation to part of our lexicon. For better or worse, sexting is now an intrinsic part of our world. But the perception many people have of this sexualised cyber-communication is wrong. Sexters, particularly young ones, have moved on from flirty texts and MMS messages. The last couple of years have seen a fundamental shift in the way young people communicate, a shift that sexting has found itself intertwined with.
The change in communication has been brought about by the inexorable rise of messaging apps. Just one or two years ago exchanging mobile numbers, or perhaps even Facebook details, was the norm, in fact it seemed that instant messaging online was going to be monopolised by Facebook. But a combination of factors undermined Facebook’s position as the go-to communication platform for teenagers, not least Facebook’s growing reputation as a stomping ground for nosy parents and tedious baby pictures.
These apps, such as WhatsApp, WeChat, KakaoTalm, Line and Kik, provide a simple way to send texts and pictures while bypassing SMS costs. The appeal of zero cost messaging has propelled messenger applications onto the phones of teenagers around the world at an extraordinary rate. WeChat has 236 million active users and WhatsApp over 300 million. Staggeringly, WhatsApp users share over 325 million images every day. Freely sending and receiving pictures over mobile apps has become the norm for a generation of youngsters.
However when it comes to sexting, one app is king – Kik. In fact there seems to be no reason to use Kik other than for risqué messaging. Kik users can use the service anonymously, with users being able to connect with each other by simply adding each other’s username. Unsurprisingly, the Kik names of young teenagers have become hot property online.
Countless sites such as hornykik.net offer lists of Kik usernames and mainstream forums are full of posts begging for Kik usernames. One thread called “Dirty & horny KIK Messenger usernames” on topix.net has almost 25,000 posts on it. While there are people claiming to be adults exchanging their Kik name, there are just as many who aren’t.
“My name is June, 15 going on 16, into younger boys. 12-17 please.:) bi guys are welcome.:) I trade pics. ;D”
“Hey, my kik is[username redacted], I would like girls 11~17 talk or trade, I just want any nice GIRL to talk to, btw im male”
“I’m 12 m lookin for a f under 15 my kik is [username redacted]”
“Kik me girls 12 and up im horny with 6″ cock [username redacted]”
“Hey girls kik me at [username redacted]I’m 15 want to trade nude pics in 15 will trade with girls ages 11-17”
Other sites like kikhorny.tumblr.com and kikme.net are places where Kik users can post their details. Again, many are looking to connect with teenagers.
“15M 6.5 inches Girls from ages 14-18 kik me, willing to do anything for you girls(; [username redacted]”
“Hi I’m 14 F CA Looking to chat with anyone around my age If you’re lucky I’ll trade .Kik : [username redacted]”
More disturbing than these sites that cater to kik users looking to sext are the countless other chat facilities throughout the web where predators target young people for their Kik names in environments they should be safe in. The problem is particularly prevalent in the chat facilities of online games.
The Kernel asked a former moderator, who helped out on apps by a major gaming company, to describe what his role was like.
“People using the in-game messaging systems to harass young players for their Kik username is a huge problem. Developers aren’t interested in stopping their users, who include 12 and 13 years olds, exchanging contact info with the intent of sexting each other. Unpaid volunteers work late into the night to try and safeguard the users, but to no avail. Users may get banned for a day, maybe a week – but they always come back. At the company I helped at, the developers actually said ‘we’re not going to do anything about this because we will lose money.’”
It’s not like Kik or the app stores that distribute it are unaware of Kik’s potential for abuse, as these reviews left recently on the Google Play store demonstrate.
Untitled-1
On the surface, the use of messaging apps may seem like an incremental shift from SMS and social media messaging services, but they are altering young people’s perception of communication. Fast and unlimited phone to phone messaging, augmented by photos, is now the norm for a generation of teenagers. Throw in anonymity and companies with no interest in safeguarding teens from predators and it has the potential to become a dangerous mix. Only time will tell how being constantly hit on for their anonymous nom de guerre will affect today’s youngsters.

Food banks brace for wave of hungry masses as federal food stamp cuts kick in

naturalnews.com

Originally published November 2 2013food

Food banks brace for wave of hungry masses as federal food stamp cuts kick in

by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor

(NaturalNews) The federal food stamp program known as the "Supplemental Nutrition and Assistance Program" (SNAP) has now been cut by a small amount -- just $36 / month for a family of four. But even this tiny reduction in a national entitlement program is causing shockwaves across the nation as food banks scramble to handle the anticipated surge in "hungry masses."

"Food banks across the country, stretched thin in the aftermath of the recession, are bracing for more people coming through their doors in the wake of cuts to the federal food stamp program," writes USA Today.

There are almost 50 million Americans on food stamps right now. A family of four used to receive roughly $600 / month from the government, but that amount has now been cut by around six percent. The fact that this $36 reduction is causing so much panic underscores just how deeply millions of Americans have come to depend on government money to simply survive.

Cuts deemed "catastrophic" for many people

These cuts, "will be close to catastrophic for many people," said Ross Fraser, a spokesman for Feeding America, as quoted in a story by CBS News.

"It's going to send people into a charitable system that's already overwhelmed and screaming for help itself," says Jim Weill of the Food Research and Action Center, also quoted in that same CBS story.

CBS somehow blames the massive increase in food stamps on the "housing crash" of 2006 - 2007, utterly failing to mention that widespread joblessness is being caused by Obama's economic policies and the disastrous Obamacare program itself. Instead, CBS says:

...Participation in SNAP has soared during the epic downturn and ongoing job slump that followed the housing crash, with an additional 21 million people added to the rolls since 2008.

Already talk of "food riots"

"If you look across the world, riots always begin typically the same way: when people cannot afford to eat food," said Margarette Purvis, the president and CEO of the Food Bank for New York City, as quoted in a Salon.com article.

"Our members are panicking," Purvis told NBC News, adding that "We're telling everyone to make sure that you are prepared for longer lines."

The question on everybody's minds, of course, is: What happens when the available food runs out and millions go hungry? While that scenario may not unfold this year, the fact that more and more people are losing their jobs and needing food stamps to survive inevitably puts an increased burden on food banks, too.

Don't confuse SNAP food stamp program with "nutrition"

Just for the record, by the way, the federal food stamp program is full of fraud and abuse. People sell EBT cards for cash on Craigslist, for example, and many retail stores have been busted trading cash for card charges, allowing food stamp recipients to acquire cash they use to buy crack, meth or other drugs.

Even when used for food, the SNAP program is often used to buy toxic, highly-processed junk food products. EBT cards can be used to buy cookies, sodas, toxic hot dogs and processed meats, foods contaminated with pesticides and heavy metals, and other toxic products that drive up long-term health care costs.

Personally, I support having a basic food safety net in place for needy families but only if credits can be used to buy truly nutritious foods, not processed junk foods that enrich wealthy food corporations.

Why should taxpayers foot the bill, after all, for toxic products that make families and children sick? This is especially true when you consider that taxpayers have to pay a second time for the health care costs associated with such poor food habits. For every dollar spent on junk foods today, somebody's going to have to pony up another $5 - $10 later on to cover the health care costs associated with that food. (Have you priced cancer treatments lately?)

The best food stamp program would be to end Obamacare and restore jobs across America

At the risk of offending socialist entitlement-state worshippers who remain astonishingly ignorant about economics, allow me to point out the obvious here: The only reason so many people are on food stamps is because their jobs are being systematically destroyed by disastrous government economic policies and the Obamacare program in particular.

Thanks to Obamacare, employers everywhere are slashing hours, cutting jobs and giving people pink slips in record numbers. The Obamacare mandate simply makes it too expensive to keep as many employees on the payroll, so they're getting dropped.

Most people on food stamps would rather have a job that pays enough to buy their own food! But in this economic downfall that has accelerated since Obama's election in 2008, there are fewer and fewer opportunities even for people who want to work.

But this seems to be Obama's grand plan: destroy the middle class and turn tens of millions of people who previously had jobs into new government dependants who are practically forced to vote for Democrats to keep the entitlement checks coming. Every job that's lost in America is a victory for Democrats and the socialist entitlement state. The last think Democrats want is people who can feed themselves, buy their own health insurance and not need a nanny state government to take care of them.

The default campaign selling point of left-leaning government, after all, is the promise that "you can't survive without us (the government)." And to make sure that's true, the political left in America is destroying the economy, creating a self-fulfilling prophecy of voter dependence that will ensure continued victory for entitlement-oriented politicians in every election.

Such an expanding spiral of dependence and entitlements, by the way, inevitably ends in economic doom and government collapse. "The problem with socialism," Margaret Thatcher once uttered, "is that sooner or later you run out of other people's money."

Sources for this article include:
http://www.nbcnews.com/business/families-bra...

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505145_162-57609...

http://www.salon.com/2013/10/28/riots_always...




All content posted on this site is commentary or opinion and is protected under Free Speech. Truth Publishing LLC takes sole responsibility for all content. Truth Publishing sells no hard products and earns no money from the recommendation of products. NaturalNews.com is presented for educational and commentary purposes only and should not be construed as professional advice from any licensed practitioner. Truth Publishing assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. For the full terms of usage of this material, visit www.NaturalNews.com/terms.shtml

Is Laura Knight Jadczyk a Psychopath?

Or how LKJ told a woman to lie to the French Police in order to falsely incarcerate an innocent man.

Jay Weidner here:http://www.jayweidner.com/LaurasColors.html
Apparently the French authorities are investigating Laura Knight Jadczyk. Below is her recent description of what is happening to the cult and how the French authorities are handling Ms. Jadczyk. I will be coming in from time to time to comment on her remarks. But I must tell you from the beginning that Laura Knight Jadczyk’s remarks below are proof positive that she is a full-blown psychopath. My comments will be in bold. Laura is writing this just in case you don’t know.
“UPDATE: This ridiculous situation of being investigated by the French Police Judiciare searching for some "infractions" continues so we decided to bump the story back to the top with the updates. It is beyond all imagining that such a big to-do is being made about such a pathetically cooked-up allegation. But I guess that if you live your life cleanly and make sure you cross all your "t's" and dot your "i's," legally speaking, the people that want you to shut up and go away get desperate and try to find any accusation, no matter how weak and unfounded, to harass and wear you out.
Here we discover that Laura lives a clean life and she does everything perfect when it comes to legal matters.
Another member of the SOTT household was interrogated by the French police on Sept 14, and still another, Dr. Gabriela Segura, will be interrogated on the 15th (today). We have been advised that I, LKJ, will be interrogated soon. And, believe it or not, they are finally going to get around to interrogating the woman who is at the center of the situation next week.
After reviewing the questions that have been asked and the way they were asked (along with the fact that the Police Judiciare got a court order to access our bank records and probably have been tapping our phones and internet service), we have been able to get a vague idea of what they are trying to find out. Among those questions is one about sex. That is, do we demand celibacy from our "followers" and in our house?! Apparently, someone told them that we do which is totally ridiculous but you see where a question like that leads? You end up having to explain your SEX LIFE to the police! Can anybody really believe this is happening?
Seems perfectly fine if they want to ask about someone’s sex life, especially if it is in a group living situation that reeks of a cult. How many cults have we discovered that use sex ­ or lack of sex ­ to control its members? It would be the first area of inquiry if one were trying to find out if they were dealing with a cult.
It really is incredible that the French government is so naive that they buy into the lies of an internet psychopath and are continuing to waste tax money, time and energy on this ridiculous "investigation". And that is why we don't, for a minute, believe that there is nothing sinister behind this.
Laura is telling us that a dangerous psychopath is after her and is steering the police towards the investigation. Apparently this psychopath has no motive for what he is doing. All we really learn about him is that Laura calls him a psychopath. So he is the 50 millionth person she has called a psychopath. With her high school education and zilch experience in the fields of psychology or psychiatry I think we can presume that the person in question has not been properly and legally defined as a psychopath. Laura is just name calling here. Something she really likes to do.
Now, keep in mind, people, that the whole thing started because of an online conversation among about a dozen women. One woman was in a horrible relationship of abuse and was asking her online women friends (many of whom she had met in real life, so these weren't just perfect strangers) for help in figuring out how to get the abuser to leave.
Nothing new here, women frequently get together and bitch about their men. The only thing here to understand is that Laura is telling us that some of the women have never met the woman in question and really don’t know her motivations in all of this.
This discussion went on for a couple of years. We discussed the book Women Who Run With the Wolves by Jungian psychologist, Clarissa Pinkola-Estes and the fact that she was in a Bluebeard type relationship. She told the guy over and over again that she wanted to end the relationship, that she wanted him to go.
Of course this kind of thing happens in almost every relationship and I am sure, in fact I know that Laura has been in a few relationships where things were falling apart and one side was trying to hold it together. The real question is: if the relationship was that bad why didn’t she just leave? Answer: Because she was just a woman bitching about her boyfriend to other women. She wasn’t going to leave. Because if she was going to leave, she would have!!!
She revealed many incidents of abuse and suggested sexual abuse of her children.
A … er …suggesting sexual abuse is a far different thing than accusing someone of sexual abuse. If he abused her she should have gone to the police. If he abused her children she should have had him arrested. But there is one other important factor here. Why didn’t Laura, once she saw that the woman in question was not reporting any of this to the police, report it herself? In fact it is illegal to knowingly cover up criminal activity.
He resisted and countered every effort like the perfect parasite he is, even telling her at one point that if she didn't like him, she could just leave and he would keep the house and children!!! Not sure what she means by resisted but telling someone to leave because they don’t like you anymore is a perfectly reasonable response. It would seem from Laura’s telling that he is actually trying to salvage the relationship and the woman, encouraged by Laura and her attack gang, wanted to end it. So why not walk out? The real question, which remains unanswered, is: did she ever walk out on the guy?
Finally, I (LKJ) just told her to threaten him with reporting him to the police to get him to leave. My exact words were: Then make it simple for him: Be a Wolf woman and make him so miserable that he does not want to be there. Or put his clothes out and change the locks and tell him if he comes near you, you will cut yourself, call the police and tell them he did it. Tell him you will report him for abusing the children. Tell him that you will deny on the Bible that you ever said anything like that and it won't matter anyway because he will be in jail with one phone call.
You gotta play hardball here.
And here my friends we present the evidence that Laura Knight Jadczyk is a full blown psychopath. In the above quote she is tells the woman in question to cut herself and tell the police that her boyfriend did it. She then tells her to lie and even take an oath that he cut her. She then tells her that this phone call to the police - where she lies to them - will be just fine because he will be in jail because of what she just did.
Laura Knight Jadcyzk encouraged one of her cult followers to make up a lie, repeat the lie to the police, all in an effort to put an innocent person in prison for a long time. Some of you might find this shocking but a close examination of Laura’s past reveals that she has been at this for quite awhile, But back to Laura’s ramblings because it just gets better.
Notice that I never advised her to actually make any such accusations to the police, it was all about finding the right words to get him to leave, and if that included threatening him with exposure, do it!
Now this sentence seals the deal and we can now see the entire scene coming into focus. After telling the woman to call the police and lie to them. After telling the woman to cut herself and blame the guy, after telling the woman that this single phone call will land him in prison, Laura does an about face and tells the reader that she never told the woman to lie to the police. So let’s look at her words again to make sure that I am not making a false accusation.
“My exact words were:
Then make it simple for him: Be a Wolf woman and make him so miserable that he does not want to be there. Or put his clothes out and change the locks and tell him if he comes near you, you will cut yourself, call the police and tell them he did it. Tell him you will report him for abusing the children. Tell him that you will deny on the Bible that you ever said anything like that and it won't matter anyway because he will be in jail with one phone call.
You gotta play hardball here.”
Pretty sure I’m reading this right. She, that is Laura, is telling the woman to cut herself. Call the police and tell them he did it.
Seems pretty clear that she was telling the woman to make up false testimony against an innocent man. He is innocent until proven guilty. No matter what the woman in question says.
Well, he was obviously worried that this would really happen, so HE went to the police to preempt the possibility that she would accuse him of abuse (claiming Oh, my ex is going to accuse me of abuse, but I'm innocent!),
Laura, he is innocent until PROVEN guilty
produced the email badly translated so it read as though I was actually telling her to go to the police, not just threaten him to get him out, and repeated a whole raft of ridiculous lies created by a total psychopath, that we run a cult, that I hypnotize people to turn them into mind-controlled slave/zombies, etc.
No Laura all he had to do is produce the email where you told his girlfriend to lie to the police. And why is he a psychopath? I am not a psychologist but I would say that the person who is advising someone over the internet to lie to the police is not only a full blown psychopath but actually kind of stupid.
Now, any district attorney or police force with two firing neurons in contact with one another would have contacted me, asked about the email in question, asked to see an original to determine what was really said, asked about the context, and the whole thing would have been sorted in an afternoon.
You told some one to lie to the authorities. Any reasonable person would assume that you would encourage others to lie again and that you would also lie. That would be the take that a person with more than two neurons firing would make.
But that isn't what has happened. Thus far, for going on 7 months now, the French Police Judiciare has been spending an enormous amount of time searching for "infractions" and combing through our bank records (they now know how poor we are), calling anybody whose name appears on a check we have ever written or deposited to ask details about our business, interviewing people (4 and 5 hour interviews), and basically acting like it is a case of national importance. Can you grok that? Only this is so pathetic and stupid one can hardly wrap their head around it! Geeze! All I did was tell a female friend to say whatever she had to say to get the parasite in her life off his rear end and out the door!
Go please Laura’s words again. She told her female friend to cut herself and tell the police that he did it. That she should tell the police that he was abusing their children. Just think what Laura is doing to those poor children?
Now, get this, the police captain in charge has been told these things. But she has managed to twist it around to: "Well, if she thought he was abusing her children, she should have made a police report!" That is: blaming the victim.
Excuse me Laura. That is the 64 million dollar question. The REAL question Laura, is why didn’t you ask her this question? You are really coming off as pretty naïve and dumb here. I expected more from you.
Keep in mind that she was just suspecting things, not certain of them, and was just trying to get him to leave, go away, hit the road, Jack, and don't come back.
Whoa!! So now Laura admits that there is no proof of any of her accusations, we already know that she never reported anything to the police. Without any evidence why would she call him a psychopath? Why would she accuse him of anything without evidence?
Because that is how Laura deals with everything ­ as you will soon find out!
It was a tense and unpleasant situation that needed to be dealt with before she could begin to look for any hard evidence of abuse. And geeze, considering the federal case that is being made about an email I wrote, what would they have done to her if she had no proof of abuse? How do you prove that stuff anyway?
Now we are descending into literary hell. A familiar place for Laura’s readers.
Further, the victim HAS made complaints to the police about "Jean" but was told that it wasn't worthy of a real investigation or charge!
So, this man, "Jean", can physically attack a woman, steal his ex-partner's hard drive AND use a private email badly translated as the basis of false accusations that get the Police involved in a 7 month investigation, but nothing he has done is worthy of investigating? Say what?
Please note that Laura’s writing ability is beginning to deteriorate. If he physically attacked the woman why then didn’t she report it? Furthermore, Laura, why didn’t you pick up the phone and call the police the minute that you heard the woman’s story?
Either that, or the French authorities have been tasked with putting SOTT out of business. If that is the case, they are really desperate and, since we live clean lives and obey the laws of the land, manage our activities with care, there isn't anything they can accuse us of... so they have had to create it almost literally out of nothing.
Out of nothing? Really? Advising a person to cut herself and tell the police that someone else did it so that he goes to prison is nothing? Advising a person to tell the police that this person molested her children is nothing?
What is really crazy about it is that the whole money-wasting, time-wasting, energy wasting, farce is because I advised a woman involved with an abuser, a pedophile, who had physically, sexually, psychologically abused other women and children in the past, to threaten him with exposure if he didn't leave. We do, indeed, live in bizarro world.
Yes indeed we do Laura. A long glance in the mirror will prove that one for sure. Personally I hope that this dude ‘Jean’ sues your ass over the last set of statements. What we are really seeing here folks is that Laura Knight Jadczyk has very little social graces. She really does not know what is appropriate behavior. If she was positive that the woman was being abused, both physically and sexually, by a psychopath, then Laura had no other duty then to inform the local authorities about the person in question, Jean. But Laura doies not do this. Why? Because Laura probably wasn’t 100% sure that the woman was telling the truth. It is either that or Laura is an idiot. Okay okay that is a valid argument. Because who other than an idiot would advise someone to lie to the police and do it on the internet?
The real point though is this: Laura Knight Jadczyk has gone out of her way to attack people saying the most outlandish things. Many have wondered why she does this. Many have asked why she goes out of her way to make so many needless enemies, like Jean. Laura will try to dress the situation up in the fancy clothes of her championing some cause or that she is a victim, both of these classical psychopathic traits by the way. My conclusion is that Laura is a seriously disturbed individual who can read the paragraph quoted above and see nothing wrong in it. She can actually read the words, her words, saying that she should go to the police and lie and then say that we should notice that I never told her to tell the police. This is seriously warped shit here folks.
Sott.net is a popular news and news analysis web site, but how many of our readers know what goes on behind the scenes here? For those who don't, we think it's time you were brought up to speed, for a very specific reason.
First, a little history.
Sott.net (aka Signs of the Times) began as a small internet project of Laura Knight-Jadczyk back in 2002. Particularly since the 9/11 attacks, Laura had been keeping a close eye on current events and noticing the increasing levels of propaganda and lies that were being passed off as 'news'. She had also begun to notice that many very interesting stories were receiving very little coverage by the major media outlets, not to mention the items that were being scrubbed from the net. Her natural response (natural for her, but perhaps not everyone), was to create a web site to remedy this. In the 9 years since then, Signs of the Times has grown into the Sott.net you know and appreciate today and holds true to the initial remit of its founder - to bring some truth and sanity to an increasingly mendacious and insane world.
Actually sott was and is a cut and paste operation using stories gleaned from various websites around the world, mostly she just ripped off Jeff Rense’s great site. She occasionally throws in a badly written story by Joe Quinn to make it look good. Also and firstly sott is a magnet site to suck you and your money into her cassiopean cult.
Laura's penchant for digging into stories to find the truth of the matter did not begin in 2002 however. For many years previous (all of her adult life in fact), Laura had been driven by a need to figure out the nature of the world in which she lived. Her long years of studies and research spanned a breathtaking array of subjects, from ancient history, to psychology to the paranormal and back again. It should be said that her studies and research never strayed too far from the standard academic views on these topics. In the early 1990's however, a number of (at the time) inexplicable experiences (detailed in her autobiography Amazing Grace) prompted Laura to delve into research on - horror of horrors - the hysterical world of UFOs and alleged alien abductions. As she is wont to say, of all the people who never wanted to know anything about UFOs, she deserves a place at the head of the line. But there it was, things had happened that were inexplicable and Laura wasn't going to shove them under the rug.
Now Laura introduces us to her other half of her broken personality. She starts writing about herself in the third person. Bragging about herself using the first person would seem a bit awkward. Laura sent her books out to all of the major publishers in the USA and she was summarily rejected by all of them. The comments from publishers are almost always in unison. They said that Laura can’t tell a story. Her text goes nowhere just vectoring and vectoring like a wounded butterfly. I tried reading her stuff and find her entire body of work to just be one long rip off project. There is not a shred of originality to be found anywhere.
To cut a long story short, recognizing the paranormal essence of the UFO phenomenon and including this as part of her research into the branch of the paranormal known as 'psychical research' (wildly popular in late 19th and early 20th century England and America - seances, table-tipping, contacting dead relatives etc), she decided to try her own little experiment using what is traditionally called a ouija or spirit board, but which is really just a square piece of cardboard with the letters of the alphabet on it. Again, the reasons for this experiment and the research that went into selecting the tool for exploring the paranormal are detailed in Amazing Grace.
She is purposefully rearranging her own chronology here. I don’t know why. Perhaps her memory is slipping. But SOTT was created long after the ouija board experiments and the cassiopaeans etc. I think what she is doing is she is trying to show something that is sort of legitimate like sott and placing it first and then back tracking into the more embarrassing aspects of her limited world experience.

Enter the 'Cassiopaeans'

After about two years of weekly 'sessions' where she and a friend or two or three would sit down on a Saturday evening and ask the stereotypical questions like "is anybody there" and receive back mostly garbled nonsense, a shockingly coherent series of 'messages' began to be relayed, spelled out, letter by letter via the board. Thus began what has become known as the 'Cassiopaean transmissions', or to be more precise, a rather interesting experiment in 'superluminal communication' (based on the suggestion from the 'Cassiopaeans' that they are "us in the future").
With the crucial input of her mathematical physicist husband Arkadiusz Jadczyk (whom she married in 1998 as a result of matchmaking by the Cassiopaeans), Laura used the often cryptic messages received from the 'Cassiopaeans' as clues to new directions for her ongoing research. As Laura has often said publicly herself, the Cassiopaean information has always been the 10% inspiration to the 90% 'perspiration' that she and her fellow researchers have put into their work over the past 15 years. Nothing has been, or ever will be, taken on blind faith. After all, any purported Truth, by definition, must be able to stand rigorous testing.
Basically she channels aliens through an ouija board. ‘Nuff said
During this time, in addition to her other work, Laura began to post the information obtained via the board sessions on her newly created web site Cassiopaea.org (which also hosted the original Signs of the Times page). These 'transcripts' were received with much public interest (not to mention commentary!) and within a year Laura decided to start a Yahoo discussion group as a venue for those interested in her work to discuss the details among themselves. Prior to this her inbox had been flooded daily with questions and comments, so this was a necessary move.
In early 2003 Wow a seven year time leap suddenly has occurred!!!
Laura and Ark moved to France with their family. The main reasons for this trans-Atlantic relocation were Laura's increasing revulsion at the path on which the Bush government had set the formerly democratic USA, and Ark's desire to pursue his work and collaborate with other scientists free from the strictures he had experienced within the American scientific establishment.
Actually it was to escape with the cash generated from the false house raffle and the subsequent sale of the house. The ‘scientific establishment’ that Ark was getting away from was the pentagon and more specifically the agency in the pentagon known as DARPA. Interestingly enough Jim Jones went to a DARPA controlled hospital and when he came out he became the psychopathic leader of a doomsday cult, taking his followers away from the USA for the same and exact reasons that Laura is stating. YIKES!!!
Rather than pursue the (potentially) long process of putting their house up for sale (George Bush was banging the war drums), Laura had the somewhat eccentric idea of holding a raffle. Tickets were issued to 1) anyone who made a $50 donation; 2) anyone who sent in a written request via snail-mail, a condition required by law. Approximately 300 tickets were issued in return for donations made and approximately 2000 tickets were issued to those who requested one by mail and made no donation whatsoever. This was not surprising given the limited marketing potential of announcing a house raffle on a relatively unknown web site.
Fraud can be called ‘eccentric’. Personally I like how George Bush is somehow responsible for all of this.
Now, this sum of approximately $15,000 was not exactly a good deal for a house that was valued at over $100,000, but Ark and Laura made arrangements for a loan to be taken out to cover the difference, picked a winner, and left the matter in the hands of a trusted neighbor and an attorney he had recommended. Their moving expenses were supplemented by a generous gift from a friend. As it turned out (after Laura and Ark had moved to France), the winner of the house raffle was apparently stymied by the neighbor and attorney who seemingly wanted the house to go into foreclosure so they could pick it up at auction. Laura was notified about this situation by both her U.S. bank and another neighbor who stepped in to purchase the house - with Laura's agreement - and stop the foreclosure.
It’s funny but when I put Laura’s article into MS Word to write my comments the editor in MS Word finds the above paragraph unreadable. None of Laura’s other paragraphs are deemed unreadable by the software but this one is riddled with grammatical errors. The reason is that Laura is completely lying and she can’t say it clearly. Therefore her entire writing style collapses and she resorts to fragmented sentences and unclear passages. The truth is that she is lying here. There was no winner named, if so who was it? How can a neighbor stop someone from selling HER house? All of the sudden Laura’s clarity descends into hell. She is not even sure why the winner could not get the house because she says that the winner was ‘apparently stymied’. The neighbor and the attorney (who?) ‘seemingly’ wanted the house. Seemingly? They either wanted it or not. Did they pay someone for it? Who? What happened to the winner?
The main outstanding feature of this debacle was that the only real winners were the attorneys.
That’s nice to hear because we can’t understand a single thing she is saying here. It is like listening to the head of the CIA at a press conference. It is pure 100% bullshit. She knows it and we know it.
The take-home fact from this incident is this: if Laura and Ark had decided to INTENTIONALLY run a 'Raffle Scam' it would not have turned into such a lawyer feeding frenzy because the ending would have been a pre-planned part of the con. Raffle scams are one of the simplest cons to pull off ... any moron can do it. The scammers have a faithful follower (or even a sock puppet on the Net) gleefully posting "I won, I won" all over the web. The grand prize (car, house, etc) changes title to an anonymous corporation in Delaware ... and that's that. But none of this happened, which spells out clearly that there was no intent to defraud anyone. There was no raffle 'scam' and there were no 'victims' ... just a fouled up fundraiser that didn't turn out the way anyone planned, especially Laura.
Laura is on such thin ice here that it hurts. Why doesn’t she name the person who won, tell us why this person decided to not take the house, provide an email contact so that this winner can give their side? Because there was no winner. We have already seen how easily lying comes to the lips of Laura Knight Jadczyk. Why not tell some more lies.?
The people who actually made donations for raffle tickets to the "seemed like a good idea at the time" fundraiser know and accept honest mistakes as a fact of life, and they don't hold Laura and Ark to some unreasonable standard of perfection. Members bought their tickets to support their group, it was their money, and not a single one of them has brought a verifiable public complaint against Laura and Ark. Not one! The raffle was held honestly and fairly. The names of all those who responded were put into a 'hat' and one name was randomly selected, and that person was notified that they had won and given information about how to contact the lawyer handling the transfer of ownership. What happened after that was completely out of Laura and Ark's hands because they had moved to France.
Here Laura in the third person is skirting with disaster. She still has not named the winner or told us why the winner has refused the house. But somehow she knows how each and every person who purchased a ticket thinks and feels inside.
If anyone who actually took part in the raffle had a beef with Laura, Ark, the group, school, etc, they could easily have written a letter asking for a refund on their ticket, posted it on the many slander sites and forum threads....and SIGNED THEIR NAME TO IT. A legitimate dissatisfied raffle ticket holder could have filed an action in small claims court and posted that paperwork too.
Laura, you were living in France. They would have to file in Toulouse and you know that.
None of this has happened, check for yourself ... there are NO pending lawsuits and/or outstanding criminal charges against Laura Knight-Jadczyk and/or Arkadiusz Jadczyk! These are LIES being spread all over the Internet by Vincent Bridges, Jay Weidner, Chris Horlacher and their tiny troop of deranged minions. They've taken an honest mistake that Laura made and apologized for years ago, and twisted it to the point that it's totally unrecognizable when compared to the actual truth of the matter. But enough on that topic.
Yes that would be a good idea Laura. I bet that the editor software in MS Word won’t have as much trouble with your meandering sentences and fragmented ideas as witnessed above. This article goes on and on after this with Laura bragging about what a great ‘investigative journalist’ she is.
The point of this posting is to refute Laura Knight Jadczyk’s erroneous and ridiculous statements. In the article that follows, which I am not going to bore you with, she releases private exchanges between the man she accuses of being a psychopath and his wife. After going on and on about how unfair it is that Jean took info from his wife’s lap top she then takes info from his wife’s laptop and puts the transcripts out for the world to see. Page after page of transcripts were released to make this guy look bad. This is a familiar tactic used by Laura. Of course the fact that she heavily edits all of these transcripts to make the person look really bad is never told to the reader. Laura did this with me (Jay Weidner). In 2002 I stupidly tried to make a peace agreement between her and my former go-writer Vincent Bridges. She took my peace offering as a stab in the back and released our private email exchange without permission. Comparing her release of our email exchange and the real email exchange reveals that Laura is editing through the emails removing comments by her that make her look stupid and adding comments that make her look smart. She also edits my words so I sound dumb. There is little doubt that she edits all the transcripts that she releases. Laura has no regard for the truth. She is a hysterical, ridiculous pseudo intellectual without a shred of original thought in her.
In the future I will be deconstructing more of her essays so that the interested reader can reach conclusions based on evidence instead of Laura’s incoherent ramblings.
For the entire article by Laura write me at jayweidner@sacredmysteries.com