Oh No! Don’t do it, Mr. Trump!


It seems to me that,

The manipulators of political-control in this country, are trying their best to influence the future political make up of the next administration. Now, with the possible appointments of past pro-war “neo-cons”, to the heart of the possible Trump Presidential Cabinet, leaves me and many other TRUE Liberty-Lovers very highly concerned. Time for the Great People of this Great Land to take a stand now, and champion true liberty and freedom by decrying the personages being seriously considered for appointments to positions of political power. OUR very future is at stake (still, and ever more so).

“Trust is slowly earned, and easily lost.”

Part of my initial reasoning for taking a “wait-and-see” approach, before placing any considerable trust within President-Elect Donald J Trump:

Was in remembering his visits with Henry Kissinger (the former Secretary of State who got us involved in the quagmire of the Vietnam War), Newt Gingrich (who has been consistently pro-war in his desire for further meddling into the affairs of the Middle East, especially when he was still the Speaker of the House). These two figures have been involved in many shady dealings and pro-war policies that have helped to cost the united states of America, untold billions of dollars, and many tens- (if not, hundreds-) of thousands of American and allied lives. The “united states” is STILL feeling the economic back-spin from these egregious wars!

More bothersome still,

It seems he is also considering appointing  John Bolton (who fully supported and championed the big lie of “Saddam’s possession of weapons of mass-destruction” claim, and its attendant excuse for the devastation of the countries of Afghanistan and Iraq [let alone, their miserable conditions after all that!] ), as well as William Kristol (one of several pro-war neo-cons who drafted the infamous document (excuse) for war with Afghanistan and Iraq: “Project For The New American Century“, out of: The “American Enterprise Institute”, Along with Bolton, Frank Gaffney (of “The National Center for Security Policy”- another pro-war neo-con “think tank”) – as another possible appointee.

It seems the more things “change”, the MORE they remain the same!

“Have we NOT been down this road BEFORE? ? ?”

What does it take (besides a massive conversation with The People) to get the point across that: It is THESE kinds of people who get us all into more “hot water”, and into more expensive outlays (also in terms of great tragic loss of human life). We have had ENOUGH of these pecuniary, expensive, unnecessary “wars”, and definitely had enough of the over-policing of our (usually) peaceful Peoples of these united states (all under the excuse of “national security”)!

Please, Oh Dear God(dess), PLEASE – NO MORE of these Washington Insiders! ! !

Get them ALL out of the way, and out of places for them to do us all harm! If you do not show us how serious you are about “cleaning house”, when it comes to dealing with the venomous “lobbyists” and “global-loyalists” (starting with some of your “appointments”), you have all but betrayed the trust that MANY of America’s voters have placed within you, Mr. Trump. It is past time to start ditching many of the “professional politicians” who have been gleefully feeding from the public trough, all the while we have more and more American People, left upon the streets to starve – and with no real future of opportunities left to them!

It is past time, to make some serious, realistic, and ethical changes, in HOW our Representative-Republic does the People’s Business.

– Rev. Dragon’s Eye

 

New Study Finds GMO Corn Makes Rats Infertile.


Unlike GM corn, non-GMO corn doesn’t cause sterility.

New Study Finds GMO Corn Makes Rats Infertile
Image Credits: Vmcreddy / Wiki.
by: Christina Sarich
Infowars.com
July 2, 2015

Still think GMOs and their non-GMO counterparts are equivalent? Think again. Unlike GM corn, non-GMO corn doesn’t cause sterility. A new study released by Egyptian scientists found that rats fed a GMO diet suffer from infertility, among other health issues.

Researchers from the Food Technology Department, Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Anatomy and Embryology, and Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Suez Canal University, Ismailia, Egypt, have found that several unsavory changes occur when rats were fed GM corn.

The rats’ organs/body weight and serum biochemistry were altered, indicating potential adverse health and toxic effects.

“GM corn or soybeans leads to significant organ disruptions in rats and mice, particularly in livers and kidneys. In addition they found other organs may be affected too, such as heart and spleen, or blood cells. The kidneys of males fared the worst, with 43.5% of all the changes, the liver of females followed with 30.8%”

Additionally, by day 91, many of the rats fed a GM diet were completely sterile.

As reported by Sustainable Pulse:

In the third study, histopathological examination was carried out on the rats fed the GM maize, and the results were compared with rats fed non-GM maize. The study found clear signs of organ pathology in the GM-fed group, especially in the liver, kidney, and small intestine. An examination of the testes revealed necrosis (death) and desquamation (shedding) of the spermatogonial cells that are the foundation of sperm cells and thus male fertility – and all this after only 91 days of feeding.”

How long do you think this effect will take to show up in human beings who eat GM food?

The study abstract reads:

“This study was designed to evaluate the safety of genetically modified (GM) corn (Ajeeb YG). Corn grains from Ajeeb YG or its control (Ajeeb) were incorporated into rodent diets at 30% concentrations administered to rats (n= 10/group) for 45 and 91 days…General conditions were observed daily…and serum biochemistry were measured. The data showed several statistically significant differences in organs/body weight and serum biochemistry between the rats fed on GM and/or Non-GM corn and the rats fed on AIN93G diets. In general, GM corn sample caused several changes by increase or decrease organs/body weight or serum biochemistry values. This indicates potential adverse health/toxic effects of GM corn and further investigations still needed.”

This study simply corroborates previous findings, proving the same deleterious effects. Russian biologist Alexey V. Surov and his colleagues found that Monsanto’s genetically modified (GM) soy, grown on 91% of US soybean fields, leads to problems in growth or reproduction – in many cases, causing infertility. Animals who ate GM soy were sterile by the third generation.

Years ago, Natural Society unveiled proof that hamsters fed Monsanto’s GM soy for two years had growth and development abnormalities, and also – became sterile.

If you don’t see a pattern here, you might need to look again.

This article originally appeared at Natural Society.


 

COMMENT FROM THE POSTER:

How much clearer does it need to be? GMO’s and the general “Frankenstein Mentality” behind genetic-engineering sciences has a price, and a very high, perhaps irreversable one! This has the stamp of the “endgame plan” for humanity by the globalists. This was also one of the many ways supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to control and forcibly-reduce the world human population (along with the use of “vaccines”)!

It can be NO clearer what their intentions for us really are.

This is also WHY the Trans-Pacific Partnership “trade” agreement, Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership treaty, and all other similar “trade treaties” need to be scrapped, NOT supported and passed. They are the means and the way to do an end-run around our domestic laws and codes on safety, quality-control, and environmental concerns. Though I am for less government, wherever and whenever possible, I am also for disallowing and stopping the privatization through “corporatization” of virtually every aspect of our lives. All of this must be scrapped, right now!

Rev. Dragon’s Eye,
Founder and Chief-Elder Dragon of the Temple,
TEMPLE OF THE ANCIENT DRAGONS

 

 

Whistleblower Targeted for Exposing UN Troops Raping Children


(Reposted from: THE NEW AMERICAN website)

Written by  Wednesday, 29 April 2015,

United Nations “peacekeeping” troops deployed on a UN “peace” mission in the Central African Republic were systematically raping and sexually exploiting starving young children, according to a leaked internal report that the global organization was seeking to conceal. Because UN leadership failed to take action against their soldiers’ widespread sexual abuse of children — some of whom were less than 10 years old — an aid worker with the organization in the war-torn African nation handed the document to French authorities. As has become the norm when UN military forces are exposed raping, abusing, and murdering the populations they are ostensibly supposed to “protect,” the UN responded to the leak by suspending the whistleblower from his post and trying to cover it all up rather than dealing with the savagery.

On April 29, though, despite the ham-handed effort to quash the news, the explosive UN report documenting the organization’s crimes was making headlines around the world after first being reported by the U.K. Guardian. According to the British newspaper, which cited sources close to the case and other information, the whistleblower who first alerted French authorities about the problem was Anders Kompass. The Geneva-based director of field operations for UN programs, a Swede working in humanitarian missions for three decades, was reportedly suspended from his post and is now being investigated by the UN Office for Internal Oversight Service (OIOS). He could be fired for leaking the material, and the official inquiry of his case is “severely restricted,” according to reports.

The Guardian also reportedly obtained a copy of the internal report from the Obama-backed MINUSCA mission in the African nation. Entitled “Sexual Abuse on Children by International Armed Forces,” every page of the document was stamped “Confidential.” According to media reports, the investigation documented “rape and sodomy” of “starving and homeless young boys” by UN troops from France. Some of the victims interviewed for the report were as young as nine years old. The abuse documented in the investigation reportedly took place at a UN-run center for internally displaced people in the Central African Republic’s (CAR) capital city Bangui, which has suffered from years of war as Islamist militants sought to take over the nation. Top UN officials, including the self-styled “High Commissioner for Human Rights,” are fully aware of the grotesque crimes and the retaliation against the man who exposed them.

Interviews with the child victims raped and abused by UN troops were conducted last year by various bureaucrats from different agencies, according to news reports. “The children identified represent just a snapshot of the numbers potentially being abused,” reported Sandra Laville at the Guardian on April 29. “The boys, some of whom were orphans, disclosed sexual exploitation, including rape and sodomy,… at M’Poko airport in Bangui. The children described how they were sexually exploited in return for food and money.”

“One 11-year-old boy said he was abused when he went out looking for food,” the explosive Guardian report continued. “A nine-year-old described being sexually abused with his friend by two French soldiers at the IDP camp when they went to a checkpoint to look for something to eat. The child described how the soldiers forced him and his friend to carry out a sex act. The report describes how distressed the child was when disclosing the abuse and how he fled the camp in terror after the assault. Some of the children were able to give good descriptions of the soldiers involved.”

Unsurprisingly, as the latest scandal surrounding predatory UN “peace” troops and retaliation against the whistleblower was unfolding in headlines around the world, the UN sought to justify its persecution of the aid worker, its lack of action, and the attempted cover-up. “The unedited version was, by a staff member’s own admission, provided unofficially by that staff member to the French authorities in late July, prior to even providing it to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights’ (OHCHR) senior management,” a spokesman for UN Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon said in a statement quoted by Reuters after the scandal broke. “This constitutes a serious breach of protocol, which, as is well known to all UN OHCHR officials, requires redaction of any information that could endanger victims, witnesses and investigators.”

It was unclear whether the UN actually believed that allowing French prosecutors to have access to the documents would be likely to “endanger” anyone or anything — except perhaps the UN, its lawless military campaigns, its already soiled reputation, and the ongoing rape of children by UN troops. Top UN officials, though, ignored warnings from Swedish authorities not to retaliate against the whistleblower, who risked his career to expose and halt the brutal abuse of children by UN forces. Sweden’s ambassador to the UN was quoted as warning senior UN leaders that “it would not be a good thing if the high commissioner for human rights forced” Kompass, the whistleblower, to resign his post. In fact, the Swedish ambassador even threatened to make the scandal public if the UN retaliated, and to engage in what media reports described as “a potentially ugly and harmful debate.” The UN did it anyway and is now facing additional scrutiny.

However, as The New American has been documenting for many years, the abuses by UN “peace” troops in CAR are hardly an isolated phenomenon. “The regular sex abuse by peacekeeping personnel uncovered here and the United Nations’ appalling disregard for victims are stomach-turning, but the awful truth is that this isn’t uncommon,” explained co-director Paula Donovan with the advocacy group Aids Free World, which provided the UN Human Rights Commission report on the sexual abuse to the Guardian. “The UN’s instinctive response to sexual violence in its ranks — ignore, deny, cover up, dissemble — must be subjected to a truly independent commission of inquiry with total access, top to bottom, and full subpoena power.”

Indeed, the latest UN “peacekeeping” horror story follows a long and horrendous pattern of UN abuse and exploitation of civilian populations — and especially of children. As The New American reported in February, for example, rather than protecting local civilians in Haiti, UN troops were behaving as ruthless predators, systematically preying on the population, and raping and sexually abusing even young children with impunity. In one particularly monstrous series of crimes, an investigative report highlighted the brutal raping of a mentally handicapped young boy — starting when he was just eight years old and lasting for five years — by UN troops from Pakistan. When it was reported to the Pakistani UN commander, rather than reporting it to the UN mission, the commander “decided to handle it himself.” Apparently the UN officer was hoping the case would disappear, “since he was also abusing the boy.” The UN force then reportedly hired a kidnapper to hide their victim from investigators.

Instead of dealing with the ghastly and systemic abuses perpetrated under its latest decade-long occupation of Haiti — as in CAR and other nations occupied by the ruthless peace armies — UN military officials sought to cover it up and even retaliate against whistleblowers there, too. On top of that, the global outfit’s “peace” armies have been spreading deadly diseases among the traumatized population. Cholera spread by UN forces has already killed almost 10,000 Haitians so far, with hundreds of thousands falling ill. All the while, the UN continues to avoid any semblance of accountability under the guise of “immunity.” Meanwhile, shortly after shooting at protesters in Haiti late last year, UN troops gunned down unarmed protesters in Mali early this year while occupying that country, killing several and wounding more.

As The New American and numerous other sources have documented based on official reports and other information, systematic sexual exploitation and abuses of civilians by UN forces is beyond common. Just in the Ivorian town Toulepleu, for example, a poll conducted by the non-profit Save the Children revealed that eight out of 10 minor girls admitted to regularly being raped and forced into sexual acts by UN soldiers. “They grabbed me and threw me to the ground and they forced themselves on me,” an Ivorian girl known as “Elizabeth,” just 13 years old when she was gang-raped by UN troops, recounted to the BBC in 2008. “I tried to escape but there were 10 of them and I could do nothing…. I was terrified. Then they just left me there bleeding.”

Similar horror stories have emerged from virtually every nation occupied by the global body’s “peace” armies. Virtually no UN soldiers have been held accountable, let alone the UN itself.

Going further back, history is also replete with UN-sponsored atrocities. In Rwanda, for example, UN “disarmament” bureaucrats forcibly disarmed civilians, many of whom were later exterminated in the government-backed 1994 genocide. As far back as the early 1960s, the UN waged a ruthless war against the anti-communist people of Katanga (which had seceded from the Congo) in a bid to force them to submit to a bloodthirsty communist dictator. From Congo and Somalia to Haiti and Cambodia, UN troops have developed a reputation as terror squads there to victimize and abuse innocents rather than “protect civilians” or keep the “peace.”

Despite that track-record of murder, abuse, rape, pedophilia, human trafficking, and terror, the Obama administration has been a leading cheerleader of the UN military and its “peacekeeping” operations. In recent months, the UN, Obama, and governments around the world have launched various plans to further build up the UN military with more funding, troops, weapons, technology, and more. Obama was also a leading cheerleader for the UN’s military occupations of the Central African Republic, Mali, and other nations, even committing U.S. support without asking Congress.

While the UN’s brutality and raping of children, along with the cover-ups, is horrifying enough, it is beyond outrageous that the American people are the chief financiers of the planetary entity’s savagery. Rather than sending more U.S. tax dollars to UN “peacekeeping” schemes, Congress should defund the entire “dictators club” and prepare to have the U.S. government make a full and permanent withdrawal.

Alex Newman, a foreign correspondent for The New American, is normally based in Europe. Follow him on Twitter @ALEXNEWMAN_JOU. He can be reached at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Related articles:

Obama and UN Embroil United States in Central African Conflict

UN “Peace” Forces in Haiti Prey on Civilians, Children

UN-backed Forces Slaughter Christians in Ivory Coast

UN “Peacekeeping” Troops Face Scandals on Sex Crimes, Corruption

UN Troops Accused of Sex Crimes Worldwide

UN “Peace” Armies to Drastically Expand with Obama’s Support

UN Troops in Mali Slaughter Civilian Protesters

United Nations Exploits Pseudo-“Human Rights” to Attack U.S.

UN Unveils Plot to Reduce African Population

Doctors: UN Vaccines in Kenya Used to Sterilize Women

Carbon Scam by UN and World Bank Behind “Genocidal” Land Grabs

UN-Backed Troops Wreak Havoc in Africa

UN and UNESCO Bosses to Join Communist Tyrants at “Victory Day”

Obama Budget Supersizes U.S. Funding for UN, Global Military

The United Nations: On the Brink of Becoming a World Government

GetUsOut-banner


COMMENT FROM THE POSTER:

As if this was yet a prime reason for distrusting ANY centralization of authority from ANY centralized organization or system, such unaccountable ability to wage wars, institute public policies, and any furtherance of political power represents too great a danger to the livelihoods of the people. As each tyrant seeks to greaten his/her power, each also succeeds in protecting his/her position from all threats of accountability. Any and all who typically support the amalgamation of all political power into so few hands, either fully support such horrendous criminal acts on a massive scale, or are willingly ignorant of such historically-known abuses of that power.

This should yet be another reminder, that absolute power corrupts, absolutely! This article demonstrates terrorism on a massive scale, and as encouraged by systems of monolithic political power. If human survival is to be guaranteed, we MUST refuse to grant such systems and their organizations any and all encroachments, under the pretenses of “protecting” anything (other than their own self-interests). This why the Paleo-Pagan ways of living were so much simpler, and more peaceful – WITHOUT centralized planning and control by any over-sized political system!

– Rev. Dragon’s Eye,
Founder & Chief-Elder Dragon of the Temple,
TEMPLE OF THE ANCIENT DRAGONS

 

First They Came for the Anti-Vaxxers


The pro-vaccine lobby has done a phenomenal job of inciting fear among the American public.

Vial of Flu Vaccine
Image Credits: Samantha Celera / Flickr.

by Bretigne Shaffer
Lew Rockwell.com
April 24, 2015


Earlier this year I spent a few days at the Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center with my daughter who was having an EEG done. On our way home, I learned that there had been an outbreak of an antibiotic-resistant bacteria while we were there, that it had infected seven people and killed two of them. My daughter and I were fine – the infection having been limited to people using a particular kind of duodenoscope.

When the story hit the news, I fully expected nationwide outcry similar to that inspired by the recent measles “epidemic” that began at Disneyland. That outbreak killed no-one, yet set the country on fire with calls for mandatory vaccination and even prison sentences for parents who choose not to vaccinate their children. Drug-resistant “superbugs” kill nearly 15,000 people a year in the US and a recent report predicts that they could kill as many as 300 million people by 2050. Surely this far more deadly health threat would lead to similar widespread outrage and calls for those even remotely responsible to be held accountable.

I expected to see editorials calling for anyone who engaged in the overuse of antibiotics to be shunned by society; doctors who prescribed them unnecessarily (around 50% of all prescriptions by some estimates) to be censured and perhaps lose their licenses; parents who asked for antibiotics every time their child had an ear infection – despite the fact that the vast majority are not bacterial and are unaffected by antibiotics – to be thrown in jail for endangering the rest of us. But I saw nothing along these lines. Why not?

The manipulation of the conversation around vaccines in the mainstream media has been nothing short of a tour de force. If you read only mainstream publications, you might come away with the impression that outbreaks of measles are the most serious public health crisis since the Black Death. You might think that those who do not vaccinate are uneducated, superstitious, “anti-science” zealots who get their information from daytime talk shows. You might even start to feel outrage at these people who – for no good reason at all – have decided to endanger everyone else by refusing to do what every doctor knows is perfectly safe, effective and the socially responsible thing to do.

The presentation of this issue has been a study in just how easy it can be to generate mass hysteria around a particular threat – even while much more serious threats inspire no such response. It’s as if every mainstream reporter has been given the same playbook to use in putting together their articles about vaccines – a playbook designed to elicit the above response from the public. I’ve tried to imagine what this playbook must look like and I think I’ve come up with a pretty decent facsimile. Here it is, along with my own annotations:

1. Make it clear that parents who choose not to vaccinate their children are only getting their information from Jenny McCarthy, Jim Carey and other celebrities with absolutely no scientific credentials.

Pretend that doctors and scientists who are critical of vaccines – doctors like Dr. Suzanne Humphries, Dr. Robert Sears, Dr. Kenneth Stoller, Dr. Robert Rowen, Dr. Janet Levatin, Dr. Stephanie Cave, Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, Dr. Meryl Nass, Dr. Jay Gordon, Dr. Jane Orient, and many of the members of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, CDC researcher Dr. William Thompson, and all of the doctors and scientists listed here and here – don’t exist. Because really, if you don’t write about them, they don’t.

2. Always equate the views of the CDC, medical journals and pharmaceutical company spokespeople with “science.” Some people will try to tell you that science is a method, not a conclusion, that scientific truths cannot be determined by consensus or by appeal to authority, but you can just ignore them.

As one (self-proclaimed) scientist put it:

“In my personal and scientifically backed opinion, the war against disease is a hundred fold more important than the mum-led war against vaccines. Do you want your child to die a slow, painful, agonizing death? If not, then shut the f*** up with your so called ‘facts’ you got from Yahoo Answers and get your kid vaccinated.

“I am going to sound derogatory, but if you don’t have formal education in at least biology, you have no role to talk about the way vaccines should be done.” (Sic.)

In other words, if you don’t have the same training we do, you don’t get to be part of the discussion. Even when the topic of that discussion is whether or not we get to forcibly inject things into your bodies and the bodies of your children. Just shut up and trust the scientists. But not these scientists – they are all anti-science scientists. Only trust these ones.

3. Remind your readers that, however heart wrenching or tragic, anecdotal accounts are just that. They are not scientific, they don’t say anything about relative risk, and should play no role in influencing your opinion about vaccines.

Until you want to tell them the heart wrenching story of how author Roald Dahl lost his daughter to measles, or about the death of a young girl from rotavirus that inspired Dr. Paul Offit to develop a vaccine for that disease.

Anecdotal accounts of people suffering from vaccine-preventable illnesses are fine. Anything else though is just irrational. Take for example the thousands of stories from parents whose children were perfectly healthy until they received one or more vaccines and then suddenly lost the ability to speak, to walk, to feed themselves, or who started having seizures, stopped breathing or died. Many of the parents in these cases report that their doctors insist the vaccines had nothing to do with their child’s injury, even when no other explanation is apparent. Indeed, the vaccine manufacturers and the CDC insist that most such cases are simply coincidences and have nothing to do with the vaccines. But given the well-documented degree of conflict of interest and fraudulent practices within the CDC and the medical research community as a whole, many parents are understandably skeptical of such claims.

4. Remind your readers that “correlation is not causation.

Unless you want to show them this graph and tell them it proves that vaccines save lives:

1

Source.

Whatever you do though, make sure you don’t accidentally show them this graph instead:

2

Source.

To listen to the mainstream media, one would think that measles was a deadly affliction on a par with Ebola or the plague. Vaccine advocates distort the dangers of measles by pointing to adverse effects experienced by populations in underdeveloped countries, where even the mildest of diseases can be deadly due to things like poor nutrition and sanitation.

By the 1950s in the United States though, measles was considered a mild childhood disease that nearly everyone caught before adulthood and lived through with no serious consequences. Says Dr. Donald Miller:

“With good sanitation and nutrition, the pre-vaccine mortality rate of measles in the U.S. was less than 1 in a million (compared with 14 deaths per 100,000 in 1900); seizures occurred in 1 in 3,000 people; and encephalitis, 1 in 100,000, with full recovery in 75 percent of those cases.”

It is also worth noting that the CDC’s statement that “(f)or every 1,000 children who get measles, one or two will die from it” relies on reported cases of measles. A more accurate estimate puts the death rate at closer to 1 out of 10,000 cases.

Meanwhile, in the past ten years there have been only a handful of measles deaths in the US, but VAERS data report 109 deaths associated with the measles vaccine since January of 2004, and the US Court of Federal Claims has settled 111 claims related to harm from the MMR vaccine in that same time.

Not only is measles a relatively benign illness for healthy people living in developed countries, contracting and surviving the disease confers benefits to the immune system – as well as strengthening herd immunity – in ways that vaccines cannot.

Far from protecting the most vulnerable demographic groups, widespread vaccination has increased the risk of serious harm from measles in some of these populations: Infants and very young children, as well as adults. Normally, measles wouldn’t appear in these age groups – but now it does, thanks to the vaccine. As Lawrence Solomon reported in the Financial Post last year:

“In the pre-vaccine era, when the natural measles virus infected the entire population, measles — ‘typically a benign childhood illness,’ as Clinical Pediatrics described it — was welcomed for providing lifetime immunity, thus avoiding dangerous adult infections. In today’s vaccine era, adults have accounted for one quarter to one half of measles cases; most of them involve pneumonia, one-quarter of them hospitalization.

“Also importantly, measles during pregnancies have risen dangerously because expectant mothers no longer have lifetime immunity. Today’s vaccinated expectant mothers are at risk because the measles vaccine wanes with time and because it often fails to protect against measles.

“…The danger extends to babies, whose bodies are too immature to receive measles vaccination before age one, making them entirely dependent on antibodies inherited from their mothers. In their first year out of the womb, infants suffer the highest rate of measles infections and the most lasting harm. Yet vaccinated mothers have little antibody to pass on only about one-quarter as much as mothers protected by natural measles leaving infants vulnerable three months after birth, according to a study last year in the Journal of Infectious Diseases. [Emphasis mine.]

“Factors such as these increased the death rate for adults and the very young, helping to reverse the decline in deaths seen in previous decades, according to a 2004 study in the Journal of Infectious Disease, authored by researchers at the Centers for Disease Control and Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.”

As discussed below, childhood illnesses like measles and mumps can help to develop the immune system in ways that help to protect against things like asthma, autoimmune disease and even cancer. So the proposition that eliminating measles – rather than simply reducing its deadliness – is a worthy public health goal is a questionable one.

5. Whenever possible, present the debate as if there are no legitimate reasons to choose not to vaccinate – only “personal beliefs” and “irrational fears.

The reality is that there are legitimate and documented concerns about vaccine safety. Nobody denies this – all that is in dispute is the magnitude of the harm caused by vaccines. Vaccine manufacturers and their institutional supporters of course insist that any harm from vaccines is minuscule and easily outweighed by the benefits. However this claim is suspect for a number of reasons, not least of which is the stunning degree of conflict of interest and outright fraud within the world of medical research. Leaving aside these issues though, there remain good reasons to distrust the manufacturers’ claims.

Numerous studies fly in the face of the manufacturers’ claims, showing connections between vaccines and autoimmune disease, asthma, allergies, cancer, encephalopathy, and yes, autism. And even assuming integrity in the clinical trial process, these are not sufficient to demonstrate vaccine safety, as they typically only look at reactions that occur within a few weeks of vaccination, and only compare the adverse events experienced with one vaccine against those experienced with another vaccine – not against an unvaccinated sample. Even the Cochrane Review of the literature on the MMR vaccine, for example, came to the conclusion in 2012 that “(t)he design and reporting of safety outcomes in MMR vaccine studies, both pre- and post-marketing, are largely inadequate.”

Studies that purport to demonstrate the safety of vaccines are similarly flawed and limited in their scope. Indeed, of the list of 42 studies put forward by the American Academy of Pediatrics, with an invitation to parents to “examine the evidence”, none compare vaccinated against unvaccinated populations, and most look only at either the MMR vaccine or at Thimerosal.

Meanwhile, because of a law that removes any liability from the makers of vaccines for any harm caused by their products, the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) has paid out nearly $3 billion in damages to the families of those who claim they have been injured by vaccines since its inception in 1988. This is despite the elimination by the DHHS of most of the original adverse events from the “Table of Compensable Events”, and what NVIC President Barbara Loe Fisher calls “…a highly adversarial, lengthy, expensive, traumatic and unfair imitation of a court trial for vaccine victims and their attorneys.”

And every year, around 30,000 reports are made to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) which records adverse reactions immediately following vaccination, as reported by doctors, other medical professionals, pharmaceutical companies, patients and parents. Thirteen percent of these are classified as “serious” (including death).

Of course these numbers don’t mean very much without a comparison to the background rate of such adverse events in the general population, not immediately following vaccination. Some studies have shown no increased adverse events after vaccination as compared to the general population. Other studies (including some that use post-vaccination data for other vaccines for comparison, rather than population-wide background rates) show higher rates of adverse events immediately post-vaccine.

Vaccine proponents argue that the VAERS numbers are not an accurate reflection of vaccine damage, because each case reported has not been conclusively proven to be caused by a vaccine. It is a legitimate point – and is largely due to the fact that in most cases there is no way to confirm vaccination as the cause of the event.

The much bigger problem though is the degree to which the VAERS numbers suffer from significant underreporting. Says president of the National Vaccine Information Center and advocate for parental choice regarding vaccines Barbara Loe Fisher:

“There have been estimates that perhaps less than 5 or 10 percent of doctors report hospitalizations, injuries, deaths, or other serious health problems following vaccination. The 1986 Vaccine Injury Act contained no legal sanctions for not reporting [via VAERS]; doctors can refuse to report and suffer no consequences.”

Indeed, one study found that while 68% of cases of vaccine-associated polio were reported, only 4% of MMR-associated thrombocytopenia were reported. An earlier study found that only 1% of adverse events following prescription drug use were reported. And in 1994, a survey found that only 18% of 159 doctors’ offices made reports when children suffered serious health problems following vaccination. In New York, this number was one out of 40.

Some argue that adverse events are also over-reported to VAERS, presumably by distraught parents, but this charge is less credible. All the evidence shows that doctors and other healthcare providers are extremely reluctant to report events to VAERS. Healthcare providers account for 36% of all reports to VAERS, with vaccine manufacturers accounting for another 37%. Vaccine recipients and their parents or guardians account for only 7% of reports.

So what is the real risk of overall vaccine injury? The only honest answer is that nobody knows. The number of genuine vaccine injuries is likely much higher than what is reported in VAERS, but how much higher nobody can reliably say. The science on vaccine safety is conflicted, it is insufficient and it is badly corrupted by special interests. It is anything but “settled.”

But there’s more.

There is evidence that vaccines may cause harm well beyond what would show up in an adverse events report – harm that may manifest over many years, rather than in the days and weeks immediately following vaccination. Vaccines have been connected to increased rates of cancer, severe allergies and autoimmune disease:

As Dr. Donald Miller explains:

“Measles helps a child’s immune system grow strong and mature.

“Once past the immunologic barriers of skin and mucosa, our (2-trillion-cell) immune system has two components: An innate system, which all animals have; and an evolutionarily more recent adaptive system that vertebrates have. The childhood diseases—measles, mumps, rubella, and chickenpox—play a constructive role in the maturation of the adaptive immune system. Two kinds of helper T-cells (Th) manage this system:cellular T-cells (Th1); and humoral T-cells (Th2), which make antibodies. The Th1 cellular T-cells are especially important because they attack and kill cells in the body that run amok and become cancerous. And they also kill cells that become infected with viruses.

“Measles (and other viral childhood diseases) stimulate both the Th1 and Th2 components. The MMR vaccine stimulates predominately the Th2 side. Overstimulation of this part of the adaptive immune system provokes allergies, asthma, and auto-immune diseases. Since the Th1 side thwarts cancer, if it does not get fully developed in childhood a person can wind up being more prone to cancer later in life. Women who had mumps during childhood, for example, have been found to be less likely to develop ovarian cancer compared with women who did not have mumps.”

(The study can be found here.)

According to the CDC, food allergies in children increased by about 50% between 1997 and 2011. Asthma rates have also been on the rise, with an increase of 28% between 2001 and 2011. And childhood cancer rates have been increasing since the 1970s. The National Institutes of Health reported in 1996 that the incidence of childhood cancer had increased by 10% between 1973 and 1991, and a 1999 report in the International Journal of Health Services said that:

“From the early 1980s to the early 1990s, the incidence of cancer in American children under 10 years of age rose 37 percent, or 3 percent annually. There is an inverse correlation between increases in cancer rates and age at diagnosis; the largest rise (54 percent) occurred in children diagnosed before their first birthday. “

There are no definitive explanations for these dramatic increases in potentially life-threatening conditions among children, and in all likelihood there is no single cause responsible for any one of them. However parents have good reason to be concerned about harmful environmental factors, including vaccines. Indeed, several studies show increased rates of immunological problems associated with vaccination.

A study in New Zealand found a higher rate of asthma among those who had been vaccinated (Kemp et al, 1997); Data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Study in the US showed that children vaccinated with DTP or Tetanus vaccines were twice as likely to develop asthma as unvaccinated children (Hurwitz and Morgenstern, 2000), and another study showed that the MMR vaccine can cause human white blood cells to develop IgE antibodies – one of the main characteristics of asthma (Imani and Kehoe, 2001). A 2008 study found that delaying DPT vaccination was associated with reduced risk of childhood asthma.

Other studies have found a link between vaccines and allergies and autoimmune disease. A 1996 study in Africa found higher rates of allergies among those who had been vaccinated against measles than among those who had survived the disease. The study concluded that “(m)easles infection may prevent the development of atopy in African children.”

A 2001 study confirmed “A causal association between measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine and idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP)…”; A study in 2014 found a strong correlation between hepatitis B vaccination and higher rates of multiple sclerosis; a 1999 study in Japan found that “…gelatin-containing DTaP vaccine may have a causal relationship to the development of this gelatin allergy”; and in 2009, a Japanese study that gave mice repeated immunizations with antigen found that “(s)ystemic autoimmunity appears to be the inevitable consequence of over-stimulating the host’s immune ‘system’ by repeated immunization…”

In the journal Autoimmunity, Vared Molina and Yehudi Shoenfeld write “Vaccines, in several reports were found to be temporally followed by a new onset of autoimmune disease. The same mechanisms that act in infectious invasion of the host, apply equally to the host response to vaccination. It has been accepted for diphtheria and tetanus toxoid, polio and measles vaccines and GBS. Also this theory has been accepted for MMR vaccination and development of autoimmune thrombocytopenia, MS has been associated with HBV vaccination.”

Those who would force vaccinations on the rest of us are fond of repeating bromides like “your right to be sick ends where public health begins.” But who gets to decide what constitutes “public health”? Who decided that the eradication of every childhood illness is in the best interests of “public health”? Why are not increased rates of childhood cancer and life-threatening allergies relevant to “public health”? Why can I not demand that everyone else stop vaccinating their children because doing so directly threatens the ability of mine to contract childhood diseases which might help strengthen their immune systems?

6. If you must acknowledge that critics of vaccines have actual reasons for their concerns, restrict the discussion to the fear that vaccines may cause autism, and be sure to stress that the only basis for this concern is the retracted 1998 study by Andrew Wakefield.

You can also mention some of the studies that “prove” there is no causal link between vaccines and autism. Just be sure not to mention any of the ones that do show a connection, like this one, this one or this one. Be especially careful not to mention this one, this one, or any of these, these or these.

At all costs, never ever mention any of the concerns listed in “4.” above.

For bonus points, see if you can create the impression that the only potential problem with vaccines is thimerosal, and then declare that thimerosal has been removed from all vaccines. (It hasn’t.)

7. When in doubt, pepper your stories with some of the following affirmations. Remember: The more you say them, the truer they become: “Vaccines save lives”; “parents who don’t vaccinate are selfish” (“ignorant”, “anti-science” and “hippies” all work well too.); and above all: “the science is settled.

You may have to repeat this last one many many times before your readers come to understand and accept it.

8. Don’t even address vaccines directly. Simply include some mention of vaccine skepticism as an example of the kind of irrational thinking some people (especially, strangely, well-educated ones) still engage in despite “everyone knowing” how foolish it is.

This is perhaps the most powerful tool you can use to sway your audience. Nobody wants to be seen as foolish, and most people don’t have the time or inclination to look closely at the evidence for and against vaccine safety. If people keep hearing that “everyone knows” vaccines are safe and effective, most of them will tend to go along with that position even if they don’t know much about the topic – if only to avoid being seen as crackpots. Fear of public humiliation can be a beautiful thing in the right hands.

9. If the icky topic of conflict of interest or corruption of the research by vested interests comes up, just laugh it off. Remember: Writing in a derisive tone about other people’s claims or concerns is exactly the same as refuting them.

Amy Wallace, who wrote this Wired piece handled this especially well. And not only did she fail to interview a single critic of vaccines for the article, she cunningly created the impression that she had included their views by visiting an Autism One conference and mentioning and briefly quoting – but never actually speaking with – NVIC president Barbara Loe Fisher. Well done Amy Wallace!

Be sure to quote Dr. Paul Offit and to cite him as a “vaccine expert”. Don’t bother disclosing that he has made millions of dollars from the Rotavirus vaccine he developed. The whole notion of disclosing conflicts of interest within a story is so passé. Also anti-science.

Vaccine advocates like to point to studies that show no increased risk of harm from vaccines. They assert that these studies invalidate the findings of other studies that do show a link between vaccines and asthma, allergies, autism and other conditions. In a world in which scientific institutions could be trusted to conduct honest, objective research and produce credible results, this might provide some comfort. In the real world though, there is little reason to give credence to much of the research that gets produced on vaccines – and much less so to results that in any way favor the manufacturers of those vaccines.

Lest anyone suspect that this kind of cynicism about the scientific establishment is confined to anti-vaccination activists, here is what Marcia Angell, former editor in chief of the New England Journal of Medicine, wrote in 2009:

“…(C)onflicts of interest and biases exist in virtually every field of medicine, particularly those that rely heavily on drugs or devices. It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of TheNew England Journal of Medicine.” [Emphasis mine.]

Angell adds:

“No one knows the total amount provided by drug companies to physicians, but I estimate from the annual reports of the top nine US drug companies that it comes to tens of billions of dollars a year. By such means, the pharmaceutical industry has gained enormous control over how doctors evaluate and use its own products. Its extensive ties to physicians, particularly senior faculty at prestigious medical schools, affect the results of research, the way medicine is practiced, and even the definition of what constitutes a disease.”

Likewise, in his 2013 book “Bad Pharma”, physician (and vaccine advocate) Ben Goldacre writes:

“Overall, the pharmaceutical industry spends around half a billion dollars a year on advertising in academic journals. The biggest – NEJM, JAMA – take $10 or $20 million each, and there is a few million each for the next rank down.”

Goldacre adds that “(a)dvertising is not the only source of drug company revenue for academic journals”, and cites “supplements” – special editions sponsored by drug companies – and reprints of individual academic papers that can bring in up to a million dollars each. And he cites a 2009 study demonstrating that industry-funded studies are more likely to be accepted by journals.

The real-world impact of this control has been well documented, from the FDA concealing fraud in medical trials, to built-in biases in studies, to pharmaceutical companies misleading practitioners as to the safety and efficacy of their products, to allegations of fraudulent misconduct brought by scientists turned whistleblowers.

Recently, two former Merck scientists charged that the pharmaceutical giant “…fraudulently misled the government and omitted, concealed, and adulterated material information regarding the efficacy of its mumps vaccine…” And in August of last year, senior CDC scientist William Thompson came forward with the statement that he and other researchers had omitted statistically significant data from a 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics. (It is worth noting that Dr. Thompson’s earlier studies at the CDC were hailed as “definitive” in refuting the Thimerosal-autism link by none other than Dr. Paul Offit.)

According to Thompson’s statement “(t)he omitted data suggested that African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased  risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed.”

In a secretly recorded conversation, Dr. Thompson told with Dr. Brian Hooker, “I have a boss who is asking me to lie. The higher ups wanted to do certain things and I went along with it.” He told Dr. Hooker that “…the CDC has not been transparent, we’ve missed ten years of research, because the CDC is so paralyzed right now by anything related to autism. They’re not doing what they should be doing. They are afraid to look for things that might be associated…”

Put simply: The scientific establishment has lost any right to be taken at its word on this issue.

10.Muh Herd Immunity!

Remind your readers of our long-treasured right to herd immunity: The right to demand – at gunpoint if necessary – that others take every possible precaution against contracting communicable diseases, regardless of the risks to themselves of doing so. This is a right our forefathers fought and died for and we’re not about to give it up now.

Actually, no.

Those who support imposing vaccines by force argue that those who do not vaccinate threaten herd immunity for the entire population. The idea that vaccines can successfully provide herd immunity is already questionable, as – unlike many childhood diseases – they do not confer lifetime immunity. Nor do they offer 100% immunity to those vaccinated. But more importantly this argument presumes that “herd immunity” is something anyone has a right to in the first place.

For centuries, people have been aware that being out in public carries certain risks – among them, the risk that one might contract a disease from another person. Never before have people widely asserted that they have the right to demand that everyone around them take all possible precautions at whatever cost to themselves to make this environment absolutely risk free. If, as the mandatory vaccination proponents contend, we can demand that everyone around us take every conceivable precaution against every communicable disease, what else can we demand of them?

For starters, the recently vaccinated (with live-virus vaccines) should be excluded from all public property. And if not, why not? They pose far more of a risk than does anyone who has simply not been vaccinated. What are some other risky practices Americans should no longer tolerate from each other? Going out in public with a cold? Being a poor driver? Being in possession of any substance that might cause a severe allergic reaction in someone else?

How about superbugs? What are we going to do about all those people who abuse antibiotics, ultimately leading to the creation of superbugs. Antibiotic-resistant bacteria are responsible for nearly 15,000 deaths in the US each year, far outstripping pre-vaccine deaths for measles, mumps and whooping cough combined. Can we not hold the irresponsible people who take antibiotics every time they have a minor infection accountable for this?

Personally, I avoid antibiotics for myself and my family as much as possible. I have never given them to a child with an ear infection (and yes, we’ve had some.) Should my preferences be imposed on everyone else? Doing so would clearly strike a blow against the propagation of superbugs. So why not?

Here’s why not: Because your right to protect “public health” – whatever you think that may be given the interest-driven media hysteria of the moment – ends where my body begins.

Herd immunity is not something anyone has a “right” to. It is a positive externality, and like other such externalities it is not something you have a right to demand that your fellow human beings provide for you. More to the point, you do not have a right to demand that other parents impose risks on their children that they are not comfortable with, in order to protect your child or anyone else’s children.

The Forced Vaccination Threat: a Tragedy of the Commons

Can there ever be a point where spreading a disease becomes “assault”? Of course there can: A person who knows that they are infected with Ebola, for example, stepping into a crowded subway car and proceeding to cough all over the other passengers, could easily be considered guilty of assault. But measles is hardly Ebola (it is not even on the federal government’s list of quarantinable diseases), and – contrary to the media frenzy that insists otherwise – not being vaccinated does not equate to being infected with a disease, far less to knowingly infecting others. Failure to take every precaution against getting a disease is hardly “assault.”

Even in the case of a truly deadly illness like Ebola, there is no justification for forcing a particular method of prevention on those who have not contracted it, or forcing treatment on anyone who has. All that anyone has a right to do is demand that those people not infect others.

It should be obvious by now that none of this would even be an issue if we lived in a society that honored self-ownership and private property. In the event of an outbreak of a truly dangerous disease – or even a disease that posed a serious risk to only a small segment of the population – each property owner could make their own decision about whether to exclude those who were infected or indeed, even those who chose not to be vaccinated against the disease, presuming there was a vaccine for it.

As economist Robert Murphy writes:

“Private businesses aren’t stupid; they don’t need the government to order them to keep lepers away. And if a particular church, say, wants to open its doors to such a person, that’s perfectly within their rights. (As a matter of courtesy, we would hope this policy would be announced to others who might not want to visit the same building.) Indeed, the final repository for such people would be buildings where the owners thought they could safely contain the disease. And the common name people would use for these buildings is “hospital.” In a free society, to be “quarantined” would simply mean that most owners (of roads, sidewalks, malls, hotels, factories, etc.) would refuse access, and so a contagious person would have few choices outside of treatment facilities.”

Rather than having a one-size-fits-all solution imposed upon everyone by some authority, everyone would make choices based on their own perception of the risks. Businesses that responded to the risk sensitivities of their customers would do well and those that did not would suffer. And because not all people have the same perception of or sensitivity to the same risks, there would be a wide variety of choices: Schools that allow unvaccinated children and schools that do not; restaurants that cater to those with severe allergies and those that do not; parks, libraries, cinemas and other establishments that specialize in serving immunocompromised and other medically fragile individuals, and those that do not.

In the absence of a “commons” – property that is used by everyone but owned by no-one (or, more realistically, owned by the state) there would be no calls for anyone to have vaccines forced upon them at gunpoint. Those who believe vaccinations are absolutely necessary would frequent businesses and venues that enforced strict vaccination policies, and those who did not would frequent places that had more relaxed policies.

My own guess is that for the most part, the issue would simply go away. People would come to realize that the real risk to themselves and their families posed by those who do not vaccinate is in fact minuscule – particularly in comparison to other risks we all expose ourselves to daily. In the absence of a “commons” managed by people who do not have to earn the costs of their operation, most business owners would find that they stood to lose more by excluding “non-vaxxers” than they did to gain by allowing them in.

It is only in a world where property rights are not clearly defined, where there are great swathes of “commons” (either “public” property or nominally private property over which owners do not have genuine decision-making powers) that there can be a conflict between “public” health and individual rights. Eliminate the commons and you eliminate that conflict – replacing it with a myriad of voluntary solutions to meet the differing wants and needs of diverse individuals.

Whatever Your Views on Vaccines, the Prospect of Forced Vaccination Ought to Make You Very Very Afraid

Do those who believe in mandated vaccination really want to establish the precedent of granting a government body the power to compel people to be injected with substances against their will? You may support the forced vaccination of other people’s children because you think vaccines are undeniably beneficial and problem-free. But you may not be so thrilled about the next substance the state decides everyone should have forced into their veins.

Do you really want to establish the precedent of being able to demand from your neighbors that they pose no risk to you at all? The corollary of course being that they may then demand the same of you? If as a society we decide that we have the right to demand a 100% risk-free environment in which to live then the potential intrusions into our lives are infinite.

Even if the manufacturers’ claims are correct and the risk of serious injury from vaccines is infinitesimal, for most people it is impossible to know ahead of time whether or not they will be injured by a vaccine. Nobody has the right to force another person to choose that risk – however small it may be – over the risks of the diseases the vaccines are intended to prevent.

The state already controls vast swathes of what we can do with our lives: What professions we may enter, how and where we may conduct business, what substances we cannot ingest, how much of the money we earn we are allowed to keep, how we may travel and what indignities we must tolerate in order to do so, when and where we may protest, and the list goes on and on. If you do not believe that individuals have the right to control what goes into their own bodies then I have to wonder what rights – if any – you do believe people still have.

It seems to me that, save choosing our mates for us, the last remnant of our self ownership lies in our right not to be directly assaulted, not to have unwanted drugs or other substances forced into our bodies. If you believe that the state has the right to do this, then there is essentially nothing left that it does not have a right to do.

The pro-vaccine lobby has done a phenomenal job of inciting fear among the American public in a way that happens to serve its interests: Fear of little children who may not have been vaccinated; fear of other parents who may make choices different from yours; fear of a disease that in the developed world is far less deadly than lightning strikes. But they’ve left out one of the most frightening specters of all, one that has a truly horrifying historical record of death and destruction: An all-powerful state that can literally do whatever it wishes to those living under it. If that prospect frightens you less than the remote possibility that you might contract measles from my five year old, then quite frankly you scare the hell out of me.

* * *


 

Comment from the Re-Poster:

This just turns my stomach at how badly misinformed and lied-to we have all been! This is perhaps one of the biggest health-scams I can even fathom ever happening to a supposedly-“civilized” people, in the modern-day world. We have totally lost all touch and meaning in what Natural Health is all about. “Nature” has lost all credibility in the eyes of those who seek to further demean and minimize anything natural, all for the sake of profits, and ultimately – TOTAL CONTROL.

When comes the day when there will be no such thing as “natural immunity” for humankind, will be the day that humanity’s days are truly numbered. The last thing anyone “needs”, is an artificial “life-line”, that will eventually be cut off when one’s usefulness to the system is over. THAT will be the precursor of the God-like power of “Life and Death”, in the hands of those least responsible about its usage.

” Just say NO! ” – to vaccines!!!

– Rev. Dragon’s Eye,
Founder and Chief-Elder Dragon of the Temple,
TEMPLE OF THE ANCIENT DRAGONS

 

 

Why 9-11 Should also be considered a Spiritual War: OUR Duties.


Why I write these things.

To keep in line with the primary purpose of this personal blog-site, Spiritual Teachings and Writings, AND to put into to perspective the current goings-on in today’s society (this one being particularly the problems we face today – and – its reasoning from thirteen years ago-today), I feel I must speak of the spiritual significance of WHY we, as spiritual folks, must also weigh in on the battle for the hearts and minds of the People.

“Evil” knows no bounds, and all spirit knows about Evil.

First off,

Though there be many different personifications and personal definitions of “evil”, I think a basic understanding on what constitutes an act evil is simply: “Any selfish act that unnecessarily brings harm upon another, purely for the service and benefit of the self.” – The tyrants’ favorite expression matches this simplistic definition with: “You need to break a few eggs to make an omelet.” – This is as if WE were no better than “eggs” or any other “useful tool” to them, never considering that we ARE talking about human (and even non-human) lives here!

The other part of the problem,

Is when WE continue to allow evil acts, especially of such destructive natures and results, and choose to say nothing against them, or actually do NOTHING to stop them, WE become guilty, as partners to those acts, ourselves! The Natural tendency to feel guilt from deep within for merely allowing such acts to continue is a natural feeling of revulsion for a reason: “We know (or knew) it is WRONG!” There are many ancient spiritual texts (especially from before the age of empires) that speak specifically of this natural “sense” of right and wrong. – We do not need someone else to constantly tells what is right and what is wrong. (Though, usually “their” specific samples and definitions may be way off from reality too!  => The problem of the “church” subjectively-dictating to us these things.)

The quest for the truth, is a quest for Spiritual Truth.

We, as spiritual-minded folks, should take heed of the Divine Powers of Peace, Love, and Light. It is through these things that one may find the strength and “conviction” to stand before his/her God(s) and/or Goddess(es) to profess his/her deeds truthfully. This also means accounting for those things he/she may not have done, but should have. The aftermath of 9-11, even thirteen years later, should call upon all of us to account for our actions and inactions. This includes the inner-strength and conviction to demand the truth from those who say they represent us. If those who claim to be representative of the public’s Will refuse, then they do NOT at all represent us! Then it is within our power and DUTY, by our Gods’ and Goddesses’, to carry out our responsibilities to our Brothers and Sisters: First and foremost – to educate, guide, and BE the examples of walking in Peace, Love, and Light toward our fellow Beings. The Truth should be our very FIRST weapon, to be employed in defense of our Rights, our Ways (by our Gods and Goddesses), and of our love toward one another. – Those who choose to do nothing, are those who refuse to do their spiritual duty, as well as their natural civic duty.

Why has the “church” remained inert and ineffective?

Because of the fact that most (99.8%, estimated) “churches” have taken up the allegiance with the “state” (through “incorporation”, and then “501(c)(3) – Tax-Exempt Status”-filings) and they “system” in general, they no longer serve the true spiritual duties that was supposedly ordained of them. When the “church” becomes moribund from its true obligations, it is no longer truly a “Church Of God (Goddess)”, nor in service of the People. The “church” should be one of the FIRST places where the truth is preached, supported, and DEMANDED of those who say they “govern by consent of the governed”. The “church” should be where the spiritual strength of a community is combined and spoken of, loudly, in defense of that which is truthful and honest. Any “church” which shirks its duties in this regard, shall it become widely known, and shall it become festered with the sores of its treasures, in which it falsely be-labored itself at great cost to its fellow Beings. Even as of now, most clergy and ministerial staff of these “churches” have accepted the “training” and coaching of the state’s security apparatus, in which to become helpers and enablers of the evil state power. – “The truth be damned in their eyes!” That is why the “church” has become nothing more than a business, in which to collect the people’s treasures, and their allegiances, but without acknowledgement of the truth (and without allegiance to their Gods).

The reason our nation was ONCE great, and why it is now – NOT.

Was NOT because of one particular religion or another. It was great and a beacon of freedom and liberty because of the Natural Law which knows of no, singular religion, but of its own: The Truth, as It is! Not someone else’s warped definition of a “personal truth”, but the Truth that IS, and ALWAYS was, and always belonged with Nature, and Nature’s Gods and Goddesses. These we also belong to, not to some over-sized egos who plot, daily, on how to control everything and everyone. One who walks in the Light of Spirit and the Divine, is one who comes to know what is true from what is false, Naturally. One who truly walks in The Spirit, is one who will see through all lies; One who will not be conquered by lies. Our Nation, and Our World have been conquered for far too long in lies. NOW, WE as Spiritual Beings, from every walk of life, have a duty, a Spiritual Duty, as well as a civic duty – to return Our Nation(s), and Our World to ones bathed in the Light of Truth.

If Thou be a Minister unto Thy People, as Ordained by God,

Then WHY hast Thou let Thy Brother become lost, and fallen before Thee, whilst Thou succor me in the hopes of good favor ???

Though this may not be an exact quoting of any particular scripture, it is nonetheless a very poignant view on the common failing of many a “minister”. To me, a minister of or from his/her God(s) and/or Goddess(es) has the responsibility to teach and guide his/her fellow Beings, and even inspire them to take up the cause of Truth, and defend it against those who would defile it and try to destroy it (an impossible task!). So WHY do all these “ministers” of the great many “churches”, temples, synogogues, parishes, and whatever names have you, continue to allow evil acts upon manind and the rest of Nature’s world to be done – with impunity, and without remorse ? ? ?

So,

Even this day, thirteen years after one of the most recent, memorable tragedies of humankind began, we STILL have not yet been told the Truth! WHERE are the “holy men/women” in all of this ? ? ? WHERE is the spiritual indignation on all of these egregious acts that are being done to all of us, all on the pretexts of “keeping us all safe”, when we are NOT SAFE from those who claim to be “keeping us safe” ? ? ? 9-11 should have been a very great awakening call to America, and to the world (to some which it has)! WHY are our “churches” STILL serving those who seek to enslave us under the false paradigm of “keeping us safe”, all the while this “War on Terror” is really about destroying what is left of our cherished natural ways of life (of individual respect, freedom, and liberty) ? ? ? 9-11-2001 should have been the very day we took up the fight for honor, freedom, liberty – sustained by the quest for the Truth – against those who did this to us (foreign AND domestic agents and powers) – and continue to abuse us to this day! Let this day, on this 13th Anniversary of September 11th, be our day to finally stop being full of fear, and start being full of Love, and demand the Truth be spoken, and our people, around the world, be set free and left to be free! This, as a minister, I speak of, in full conviction, witnessed by Tiamat, the one I call my Great Mother.

– Rev. Dragon’s Eye
Founder and Chief-Elder Dragon,
TEMPLE OF THE ANCIENT DRAGONS

 

Thirteen Reasons for Questioning Why 9-11 Official Narrative is a LIE.


And just WHY should we believe the bureaucrats when they say that 9-11-2001 went down the way it did ? ? ?

So,

I came up with 13 reason why we should NOT believe a word they say, no matter HOW MANY TIMES they keep repeating the same, tire out, worn out lies.

  1. HOW could 19 “flunkies”, who could not even properly and safely land and take off in small Cessnas and whatever have you, be able to commandeer and pilot large commercial passenger planes, armed only with “box-cutters” – when many of the pilots in those planes may have been military-trained fighter pilots ? ? ?
  2. HOW could these large commercial aircraft have been able to pull off amazing and complex feats, turning in such a fashion as experience extreme G-forces, while the same manoevers are incredibly difficult in the smaller, more agile fighter planes – all by seriously inexperienced pilot-flunkies who have very little flight time under their belts ? ? ?
  3. HOW could any commercial aircraft be able to deeply penetrate the exterior structures of steel-reinforced concrete buildings ? ? ?
  4. HOW could any steel-reinforced concrete building be brought down by oxygen-starved, jet fuel fires when plenty of examples of “towering infernos” (from various media clips shown around the world). This must have been the very FIRST TIME in architectural history that steel and concrete buildings have EVER collapsed due to fires!
  5. HOW did Building 7 become involved and eventually collapse (let alone experience any kind of fire) when it was nearly a block away from the two towers which were “struck” AND incidentally sheltered from the fallout by two other buildings which were closer to the towers (1 and 2) ? ? ?
  6. WHY was it that ALL COMMERCIAL FILGHTS and virtually all other private flights in the U.S.A. were GROUNDED EXCEPT for the flight that allowed the Bin Laden family to leave the country ? ? ?
  7. WHY was our Southern National Border not closed off and why was immigration into the U.S.A. STILL ALLOWED, unrestricted while our airports and other means of public transit placed under the most severe security restrictions ? ? ?
  8. WHY (and HOW) was it that certain people in high levels and of privileged status given forewarning, often days in advance, not to fly (into or through New York – for instance), and/or to take the day off if their places of duty were in the World Trade Center ? ? ? -> WHY only certain people, but not everyone else ? ? ?
  9. WHY were suspicious folk,s who were filming the “events” and were at first apprehended, then let go, allowed to fly out of country – only to appear on television talk shows in their home countries to talk about their “documenting the event” ? ? ? – WHY was there no outrage from the news media and the public officials over this “finger in our eye” act ? ? ?
  10. WHY did (and still do) certain folks get away with profiting from the horrible misfortune suffered by so many that day ? ? ? – AND yet, still no public outrage ? ? ?
  11. WHY did an Israeli Prime Minister go on television to make a public speech as to how “This act is favorable to Israel” and worry more about how such a horrendous event that has happened to one of its supposed “allies”, bolsters its national image ? ? ? – WHERE is the utter outrage over this ? ? ?
  12. WHY have we STILL not seen any of the clear surveillance images from many cameras that pointed to the Pentagon when it was “hit” by an aircraft ? ? ? – WHY are we still being kept in the dark over this ? ? ?
  13. WHY was the public shut out from contacting their representatives and senators for weeks on end, following “the act” when policy was being secretly discussed – which ended up giving us the ill-named, ill-conceived U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T. ACT of 2001 ? ? ? – WHY does this “act” STILL does not call for improved security of our Southern Border (which is NOW completely unguarded and unmanned – so as to facilitate the continued invasion of these united states) – if we have a “terrorism problem” ? ? ?

Are we REALLY any better secured, nationally, today than we were BEFORE 9-11-2001 ? ? ?

What lessons have we learned from this national experience ? ? ?

What lessons have we learned from human history ? ? ?

What hard lessons are we going to be forced to learn someday, that we have not learned now ? ? ?

If we do not get to the bottom of all the lies and half-truths (that our “media” are blatantly complicit in) being used as baseless excuses for the plethora of public policies and regulations being issued; – We ALL will have a very high price to pay: Our freedoms and liberties ! ! !

WAKE UP, AMERICA! WE HAVE BEEN “HAD”, AND ARE STILL PURSUING THE SELF-DESTRUCTIVE PATH OF SELF-ANNIHILATION!

Get it ?!?!?

– Rev. Dragon’s Eye
Founder and Chief-Elder Dragon,
TEMPLE OF THE ANCIENT DRAGONS

 

The Coming 13th Anniversary: How long can the lies stand?


September 11, 2001 is a day that shall forever be in the hearts and minds of many Americans.

So what are YOU going to do, to further the truth that is hidden behind the veil of lies that has become the biggest excuse for a permanent state of war (against freedom and liberty) called “The War on Terror” ? ? ? The biggest excuse for astounding expenditures in defense technologies. The biggest excuse for more foreign interventionism. The biggest excuse for the murders of millions of innocent peoples around the world. The biggest excuse for toppling and overthrowing democratically elected governments around the world. The biggest excuse for declaring freedom and liberty lovers as the state’s biggest enemies. The biggest excuse for most invasive spy-state humanity has ever known. The biggest excuse for “laws”, regulations, and policies to be passed that render the average man or woman as total vassals of the state.

How much longer must we endure the lies that help to maintain the current, deteriorating state of affairs of the world ? ? ?

What will YOU, the people – my Brothers and Sisters – one and all – DO to resolve, for once and for all, the coming destruction of humanity and all of its finer institutions – all under the pretexts of lies and excuses – and keep the promises we made to our Gods and/or Goddesses – to keep and pass on the treasures of our collective experiences to our future generations?

Mark this day, Sep 10th, 2014 – as the preparation and commitment to do that which is right and proper, by and for your fellow Brothers and Sisters! – We MUST expose the lies, liars, and all the falsehoods that were dared to be foisted upon us: The Big Lie of WHY a 9/11, and WHY the continuance of the lies and treachery by our representative governments and institutions.

THIS we MUST do, individually AND collectively, if we as a species and kind are to survive to continue the promises of our Gods.

– Rev. Dragon’s Eye,
Founder and Chief-Elder Dragon,
TEMPLE OF THE ANCIENT DRAGONS

 

The Profitability of Hate. – Qui Bono?


As fear is one of the most-used tools in a tyrant’s repertoire,

So goes that hate and loathing are not too far behind. The usual modus operandi, du mode d’emploi for any tyrannical system, is through the constant beating of the drums of war. That is, a “war for the mind” of the people. It is very much a psychological war that is fought from the “trenches” of the institutions of higher learning, the private “think-tanks”, and the various “civil-rights groups” (which are known to be carefully-controlled opposition). There is much to be gained by having a cowering mass of people, manipulated day and night, through the workings of fear and seeming helplessness.

One must know, through commonsense, that Love knows of no reason to arbitrarily hate something unless there is a genuine and sufficient call for it, such as dangerous and uncivil acts (crimes being the foremost idea). However, the usual trend for societies is that they eventually lose focus of their foundations of trust and commonsense. They eventually cease to be “free societies”, and become more of a top-down political power structure; IE: as an “Empire”. Such systems are allowed to begin, through the fear and inaction of the ruled. Fear also plays a useful part in many other ways, such as “divide and conquer” strategies, which have the net effect of “Balkanizing” and compartmentalizing the people into politically-defined groups.

The history of fear and its use in politically-contrived “hate-campaigns”, is an old one.

Much about the early “churches” and their political sway has been conveniently forgotten by today’s standards. The imperial churches, and their contrived “kingdoms” and empires, have contributed much to the constant suffering of death and destruction to many peoples and cultures. One common extreme: Total annihilation of the conquered cultures – all powered through fear and loathing, and bolstered by doctrinally-programmed hatred. The various political systems that rose up over the years, have taken on very similar doctrines and methods to further their pursuits of greater power. “Fear” of those who were “different”, was most useful and most effective in accomplishing these ends. Today is NO DIFFERENT!

Today,

Most (if not nearly all) of the “civil rights” movements have gained such a reputation, and “credibility” that are at best – questionable, or at worst – very dangerous. One very obvious sign of many of these “civil-rights” groups’ having a credibility problem: How wealthy they have become, even in spite of adverse economic conditions. Many of these groups have very quickly become worth multiple millions, even though their “clients” may have not seen much assistance that equates to the actual spending of vast sums of money.

Where the mere annoyance of a “race-baiting” organization, with its attendant “spokesperson” or “chairperson” speaking on its behalf, becomes a far more dangerous organization that threatens the very basic liberties of a free people, is when it effectively becomes a “partner” with the power-hungry political system. Such an arrangement, much as many of the “public-private partnerships” we are constantly exposed to, becomes riddled with the problems of “conflicts of interest”, influence-peddling, vote-rigging, and many other devious criminal acts that would be grounds for long-term imprisonment to any private citizen who chose to do the same! Yet, these “civil-rights groups” are also in the position, by such a partnership, to craft, draft, write, and then push bills for legislation – so that they become law which affects the day-to-day lives of the people; Often, at great expense to the people’s liberties.

* * *

Infowars.com

March 22, 2014

In 1996, USA Today called the SPLC “the nation’s richest civil rights organization” with a $68 million bank account. It’s now grown to $224 million.

This article was posted: Saturday, March 22, 2014 at 11:48 am

* * *

As the previous few paragraphs AND video clip demonstrate,

There is “Big Money” in hate-campaigning, and great opportunities to become even more powerful and wealthier. All one has to look towards, is Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and likenesses. They are easily worth millions, and are very good salesmen and influence-peddlers, all because they can keep up the onus of “racism”! Many a fine business has been ruined on account of their predatory hate-profiteering practices!

We should all be very concerned when it is our “law-enforcement” and other organs of government who are taking their “cues” from such predatory and destructive organizations. The “Missouri Information Analysis Center” (or “MIAC” – for short) released a very disturbing document to the Department of Homeland Security (a very questionable and unneeded agency for a free society), detailing many different categories and groups of people to be designated as “extremists” and/or (suspected) “terrorists”. This to include those who champion individual liberty and freedom (as our Nation’s Founders are thought to have intended), private property rights, and EVEN those who merely “believe” there is too much government interference in our day-to-day personal lives (as a “bad thing”, okay?).

Here is what I am talking about: (from www.constitution.org )

Link from scribd: (“MIAC” Report)

These only serve as ONE example of institutionalized-hatred of specific groups for political purposes (mainly, supportive of the growing power of the political system). There were other such documents crafted and released across the country. The law-enforcement of the State of Virginia were give a similar draft with very much the same classifications of people and groups who were deemed “dangerous” and “possibly violent extremists”. Maricopa County, Arizona, also had a similar document released to “law-enforcement” detailing the same scare-mongering by demonizing patriotic and freedom-loving groups as “terrorists” and extremists. It even included specifics that described those who were responsible for the birth of our nation: The Founding Fathers!

The common thread behind ALL of these “reports” and policy papers:

They were all “researched” and compiled by none other than: The Southern Poverty Law Center, the Anti-Defamation League, the Simon Weisenthal Center, and their “partners” – Department of Homeland Security, Department of Defense and its constituent “sub-departments”, the Internal Revenue Service, Department of State of the United states, Department of Justice, National Security Agency, Central Intelligence Agency, National Reconnaissance Office, Naval Intelligence, the Air Force Office of Special Investigations, and this mysterious “Office of Special Plans”.

A not so obvious ring-leader in all of this:

The American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee (A.I.P.A.C.) – the most powerful lobbying group in the United States. A.I.P.A.C. has been very instrumental, and effective, in the (s)election of our candidates in office, and having some measure of control over our nation’s foreign policy. A.I.P.A.C. has also been very effective in maintaining constant smear-campaigns against its ideological adversaries. Such an organization with a very narrow focus towards American life should be, incidentally, registered as a foreign organization or agent of a foreign power – NOT a domestic organization!

Therefore,

The Question: ” ¿Qui Bono?

So, let the labels begin if some folks insist!!! I really care not for meaningless labels, coming from those too fearful and hateful towards the truth.

 ΜΟΛΟΝ ΛΑΒΕ !”  ” ΜΩΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ ! ”
( Seems there are some looking for a reason to complain about the “improper characters” being used in this common motto (in Greek), so I made the changes here to accommodate and address those sensitivities! )

– Rev. Athauliz “Dragon’s Eye” Firestorm,
Temple of The Ancient Dragons