Wednesday, February 17, 2016

The Real Global Warming Agenda

Leaked gov’t docs show what’s really behind global warming agenda; ‘profound lifestyle changes’

February 16, 2016 | BPR Wire | By Michael Bastasch


Fighting global warming isn’t just about deploying more green energy, it’s also about imposing “profound lifestyle changes” for millions of people, according to leaked European Union documents obtained by The Guardian.

“It will require exploring possibilities for realising ‘negative’ emissions as well as profound lifestyle changes of current generations,” read the document laying out the European Commission’s agenda. It was presented to foreign ministers in Belgium Monday.

“The potential scale of such a deep transformation will require a wide societal debate in Europe,” according to the document which calls for a European-wide debate on how people need to change their day-to-day lives to fight warming.

For years, European regulators have been trying to fight global warming through a variety of schemes targeting people’s energy consumption. From cap-and-trade, to high energy taxes, to green energy mandates, little has actually worked to drastically decrease carbon dioxide emissions.

In recent years, environmentalists have even been frustrated by Europe’s cap-and-trade system. In 2013, carbon prices in the EU’s cap-and-trade system hit rock bottom and it became economical to once again start burning coal — environmentalists then deemed the system “worthless.”

Europe’s CO2 emissions have come down, but it’s not clear climate policies have had any appreciable effect on this trend — since CO2 intensity of the economy is always decreasing as industries use energy more efficiently.


“And this is true for the United states, where there has been some climate policy, but it’s also true for some of the countries — Germany, Japan, United Kingdom — who have consistently claimed to be in climate policy and claim to have done a whole lot to reduce their emissions,” Tol said. “It’s just not visible in the data.”

EU leaders are now looking to capitalize on the United Nations Paris deal that was hashed out in December as a way to kickstart policy debates over how to change the way people live after years of failed energy schemes.

As part of the U.N. treaty, the EU has pledged to cut CO2 emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. But the leaked document added even deeper cuts that could be on the way after the U.N. publishes its next climate report in 2018.

It’s not exactly clear what sorts of “profound lifestyle changes” the EU wants its population to make, but the U.N. has put forward suggestions in several reports on how they want people to lower their environmental footprint.

One major activity the U.N. is targeting is what people eat. The U.N. basically wants people to eat less red meat and even supplement their diets with insects.

For years, U.N. officials have been pushing rich countries to cut red meat out of their diets because of methane emissions from cows and the amount of water it takes to sustain livestock.

“Keeping meat consumption to levels recommended by health authorities would lower emissions and reduce heart disease, cancer, and other diseases,” former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan told The Guardian last year.

“And of course there are alternative sources of protein. For example, raising insects as an animal protein source,” Annan said. “Insects have a very good conversion rate from feed to meat. They make up part of the diet of two billion people and are commonly eaten in many parts of the world.”

Truth About Zika Virus

ZIKA VIRUS NOT THE APOCALYPSE YOU THINK

Media fear mongering hypes the spread of Zika

The Alex Jones Show - FEBRUARY 17, 2016
Rob Dew talks with investigative journalist Jon Rappoport about the Zika virus and how it isn’t what the media wants you to believe.

Tuesday, February 16, 2016

Russia Bans All U.S. Corn And Soy Imports

RUSSIA BANS ALL U.S. CORN AND SOY IMPORTS DUE TO GMO CONTAMINATION

“Restrictions will be imposed on imports starting from February 15"
Christina Sarich | Infowars.com - FEBRUARY 15, 2016

Russia’s food safety regulator Rosselkhoznadzor just announced a complete ban starting February 15 on all US corn and soy imports. This is a huge blow to organic and GM farmers alike, though the ban will be instated due to genetically modified crop and microbial contamination.

Though the total exports to Russia from the US are small in comparison to soybean exports, totaling over $156 million in recent years, with Russia importing only 4,742 metric tons of U.S. corn, the ban will still hurt US farmers.

Assistant Director of the Rosselkhoznadzor, Alexey Alekseenko said:


“Restrictions will be imposed on imports starting from February 15. They (the US) have to establish a system to ensure safety of products imported to Russia.”

China has issued similar bans in the past due to GM contamination, and only recently did an “about face” on the issue. US corn exports to the country recently dropped by 85% after a report detailing GM contamination was released.

Putin recently said that Russians need to be protected from GM crops. The food latest ban follows that credo. According to the regulator, the corn imported from the US is often infected with dry rot of maize. In addition, according to the Russian watchdog, corn can be used for transgenic crops in Russia. The potential damage from import and spread of quarantinable objects on the territory of Russia is estimated at 10-15 bln rubles ($126 mln-189 mln) annually.

So, a combination of microbial disease and genetically mutated genes are both a concern for Russia, China, and multiple other countries who are refusing GM imports from the US.

Just months ago, President Putin’s meeting with US Secretary of State John Kerry revealed the Russian leaders “extreme outrage” over the Obama regimes continued protection of global seed and plant bio-genetic giants Syngenta and Monsanto.

This article originally appeared at Natural Society.

Monday, February 15, 2016

Feds Push New Plan For Home Visits To Check On Parents

FEDS PUSH NEW PLAN FOR HOME VISITS TO CHECK ON PARENTS

Government-appointed monitors to assess upbringing of children

Paul Joseph Watson - FEBRUARY 12, 2016

The federal government is seeking to create a new bureaucracy that would intervene in family life and could even see state-appointed monitors conduct routine home visits to assess a child’s well-being.

The U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has published a draft document which outlines a plan that will treat families as “equal partners” in the raising of children, opening the door for government intrusion at all levels.

The paper describes how government employees will intervene to provide, “monitoring goals for the children at home and the classroom,” and that if parents are failing to meet the standards set, “evidence-based parenting interventions” will be made to, “ensure that children’s social-emotional and behavioral needs are met.”


The document reveals how the state will help oversee, “constant monitoring and communication regarding children’s social-emotional and behavioral health.”

The program bears the hallmarks of a controversial scheme in Scotland, set to take effect later this year, under which a “shadow parent” appointed by the government would monitor the upbringing of every child until the age of 18.

“The document argues that Big Brother needs to know about essentially everything, for the supposed benefit of the child it wants to “partner” in caring for,” writes Alex Newman. “Citing “research,” the policy statement claims that “the institutions where children learn cannot ignore family wellness if they want to … fulfill their mission to prepare children for school and academic success.” In other words, every aspect of family life is now fair game under the pretext of checking “family wellness.”

The document also extends the understanding of the word “family,” to include, “all the people who play a role in the child’s life,” a definition that could include not only teachers but government monitors.

In a related development, the federal government is pushing for a task force to oversee a program under which pediatricians and doctors would, “screen all students over 12 years old regularly for depression and issue prescriptions or treatment as necessary.”

The program would increase the likelihood of teenagers being given dangerous antidepressant drugs such as Prozac and Lexapro.

The idea of children belonging not just to their parents but to a “community” that involves the state is a common theme of collectivist thinking.

That notion was promoted in the video below from 2013 featuring MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry, in which she asserted, “We have to break through our private idea that kids belong to their parents or kids belong to their families.”

100 Years Ago A German Historian Predicted The Decline Of Western Civilization

HOW A GERMAN HISTORIAN PREDICTED THE DECLINE OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION 100 YEARS AGO

Whether you agree with his ideas or not, they’re intellectually fascinating, and worth a look.
Relampago Furioso | Return Of Kings - FEBRUARY 12, 2016

Is Western Civilization in Decline? I think nearly everyone in the manosphere would agree that it is.

There is a lot of discussion these days about America and the other nations comprising Western Civilization being in decline, and there is certainly a lot of evidence to support this claim. Whether it be dying populations among the Caucasian races that created the civilization, unchecked immigration rapidly replacing native populations in Europe and the United States, evidence that America is currently and has been behaving as an imperialistic empire but is now slowly losing its power around the world, a culture that seems to completely disregard the importance of family, the building block of civilization, or a loss of religiousness and sense of purpose, signs that something is wrong are everywhere.

You may be surprised to learn that many of the things that have been happening to Western Civilization were written down in a predictive model of history written by German historian and philosopher Oswald Spengler nearly 100 years ago.

Oswald Spengler, Prophet of Western Decline

That said, Spengler has his critics, as do many misunderstood geniuses. Right or wrong, most of the attacks on his civilization model are made by those who cannot see the forest for the trees. Because of this, his genius work has largely gone unrecognized in modern times. As with many truths, “… in every culture and society there are facts which tend to be suppressed collectively, because of the social and psychological costs of not doing so,” as stated by researcher Peter Dale Scott. A lot of people seem to be turned off by a predictive model of history since the psychological cost of admitting that humans are subject to the same cycles in nature as other animals is quite high.


Whether you agree with his ideas or not, they’re intellectually fascinating, and worth a look. This article only scratches the surface of Spengler’s epic civilization model.

The Four Seasons

Spengler equated the four cycles in human civilizations to the seasons:Spring, Summer, Autumn, and Winter. In compiling his work, he studied the 8 High Cultures thought to have existed: Babylonian, Egyptian, Indian, Chinese, Mayan/Aztec, Greek/Roman or Classical, Arab and, finally, Faustian, or what we call Western civilization. He believed each of the eight civilizations went through phases, just like the seasons. While some of those cultures are still with us, they have not been dominant cultural forces since their Winter. For example, China was referred to as a Sleeping Giant until it picked up on some of the vitality of the West.

In Spengler’s model, each culture goes through a formative Culture Stage, followed by a decadent period known as Civilization. The culture period makes up the “organic” Spring and Summer of a civilization, and is when the civilization is inspired by its own art and religion. Autumn and Winter make up the Civilization phase, in which the society becomes inorganic and is based only on the organization created during the Culture phase. The creativity seen in the Culture period slowly fades away. The civilization stiffens, and becomes overpopulated, metropolitan, and uninspired. For the purpose of this article, we will focus mainly on Western Civilization and its expression of the four seasons.

Roughly speaking, each season makes up about 250 years. This procession of “seasons” happened to all civilizations Spengler studied. Spengler said that by using his civilization model he could make predictions so accurate they would astonish people. Indeed, since 1918 through the present day, his predictions for Faustian/Western Civilization have been spot on.

The full civilization model is available here.


Spengler’s civilization model – as organic as the four seasons

The Culture Phase: Spring and Summer

Spengler wrote Western civilization entered its Pre-Culture stage before 1000 AD. During that time, there is what he calls, “Chaos of primitive expression forms. Mystical symbolism and naive imitation.” As with other civilizations coming into being, in Faustian civilization there is a lot of apocalyptic imagery in this period and a fascination with death. Architecturally, the Romanesque cathedrals constructed around this time mark the beginning of the new Faustian culture form. In literature, collective epics like Beowulf and works such as The Song of Roland are published. Politically, there are “tribes and their chiefs. As yet no Politics and no State.”

Moving into Spring, there is a “powerful cultural creation from awakening souls, unity and [cultural] abundance. Great creations of the newly-awakened dream-heavy soul. Super-personal unity and fullness.” Some of Faustian Civilization’s expressions of this idea were as follows: The Holy Grail romances such as Perceval, the Story of the Grail are written. Architectural style shifts from Romanesque to Gothic Cathedrals. Gregorian Chant evolves as a musical form and we hear polyphony becoming the great Western musical form. (While we are discussing polyphony, an important note is that Spengler considered infinity to be the central, motivating idea behind Faustian/Western civilization. It is expressed in its music as polyphony, in its mathematics as infinitesimal calculus, and finally through Manifest Destiny/boundless exploration conducted by Western civilization which ultimately led it to the ultimate infinity – space.)

Politically, there is the formation of “national groups of definite style and particular world-feeling: ‘nations.’ Working of an immanent state-idea.” This is sub-divided into“The two prime classes (noble and priests). Feudal economics; purely agrarian values,” transitioning into “Actualizing of the matured State-idea. Town versus countryside. Rise of Third Estate (Bourgeoisie). Victory of money over landed property.”

Moving into Summer, we see these developments in the Culture: “Ripening consciousness. Earliest urban and critical stirrings.” In Faustian civilization, the dominant literature shifts from Grail romances to novels such as Don Quixote and Shakespearean plays. Architectural forms once again shift from Gothic Cathedrals to princely palaces and polyphonic musical forms evolve into Baroque, which is the period of the birth of Classical music. In politics we see “conflicts between aristocracy and monarchy. The political center shifts from castles and estates to the cities.”



Political Epochs in Spring and Summer


1. Feudalism. Spirit of countryside and countryman. The “City” only a market or stronghold. Chivalric-religious ideals. Struggles of vassals amongst themselves and against overlord. 900-1500 AD.

2. Crisis and dissolution of patriarchal forms. From feudalism to aristocratic State. 900-1500 AD.

3. Fashioning of a world of States of strict form. 1500-1800 AD.

4. Climax of the State-form (“Absolutism”) Unity of town and country (“State” and “Society.” The “three estates”) 1500-1800 AD.

5. Break-up of the State-form (Revolution and Napoleonism). Victory of the city over the countryside (of the “people” over the privileged, of the intelligentsia over tradition, of money over policy.) 1800-2000 AD.

The Civilization Phase: Autumn and Winter

“The body of the people, now essentially urban in constitution, dissolves into formless mass. Megalopolis and Provinces. The Fourth Estate (“Masses”), inorganic, cosmopolitan.”

We have now entered the Civilization phase as Summer transitions into Autumn. The intellect of the civilization, fully developed, begins to sterilize away the culture’s early organic nature. Spengler calls it, “Intelligence of the City. Peak of strict Intellectual creativeness.” In the West, the Enlightenment occurs during this time. Classical music peaks and then declines as an art form, further marking the shift into the Civilization phase.

The civilization becomes metropolitan, first overpopulating its cities, only to eventually begin dying out once Winter arrives. In Autumn, true art dies out in favor of metropolitan “art for the masses.” Politically, there are “struggles between the aristocracy and the bourgeoisie, Revolutions, and Napoleonism.” The American Revolution occurs during Autumn. Also in autumn we see “urban rise; peak of disciplined organizational strength.” This is the peak of the civilization, which is then followed by a “fissure in the world-urban civilization; exhaustion of mental organization strength; and irreligiousness rising.”

According to Spengler, Western world has entered Winter and its civilization is ending. He describes Winter as the “dawn of Megalopolitan Civilization. Extinction of spiritual creative force. Life itself becomes problematical. Ethical-practical tendencies of an irreligious and unmetaphysical cosmopolitanism.”

Over the coming decades, Spengler expects the intellect of our civilization to fade, people to stop reading and thinking as the civilization as a whole loses interest in thought, and the government to become autocratic/tyrannical. Art will further devolve into “meaningless subjects of fashion.” The population comprising the civilization will continue dying off as it loses touch with the myths and culture it was founded upon. We are also experiencing the “spread of the Final World Sentiment” of our civilization as the spread of Socialism around the world. As government becomes autocratic we can expect “primitive human conditions slowly thrust up into the highly-civilized mode of living.” Our great works and most of our technology will fade and lie in ruins as the population comprising our civilization fades away. First the countryside and then the cities will depopulate (as seen in the Rust Belt and now cities like Detroit.) Spengler says we should also expect conquests of our now-exhausted civilization by “young peoples eager for spoil, or [foreign] conquerors” as the imperial machinery of the State falls apart.

Keep in mind – this was all predicted in 1918 by Spengler even though it sounds as if it was written today!



Political Epochs in Autumn and Winter


1. Domination of Money (“Democracy”). Economic powers permeating the political forms and authorities. 1800-2000 AD.

2. Victory of force-politics over money. Increasing primitiveness of political forms. Inward decline of the nations into a formless population, and constitution thereof as an Imperium of gradually-increasing crudity of despotism. 2000-2200 AD.

3. Private and family policies of individual leaders. The world as spoil. Egypticism, Mandarinism, Byzantinism. Historyless stiffening and enfeeblement even of the imperial machinery, against young peoples eager for spoil, or alien conquerors. Primitive human conditions slowly thrust up into the highly-civilized mode of living. After 2200 AD.

The Future, Echoing Roman Civilization

In the Winter of Roman politics there was a shift from the Roman Republic to Caesarism, or government led by a charismatic strongman. Eventually, the idea of representation broke down and there was a shift to bloody “force politics.”

Of course, our current government is modeled on the Roman system. There are even similarities between the two dominant parties. In Rome, the two dominant parties were the Optimates and Populares, the Republicans and Democrats of their day. This form of representative government eventually stops working because the system of checks and balances interfere with each other, causing gridlock. Force politics (killing people) eventually comes along to break the gridlock. (As an aside, some historians say it’s possible we entered this era in 1963 with the assassination of JFK by the military-industrial complex.) Arguably, this predictive model is spot-on with the current situation in the Western world. So, if Spengler’s model is correct, we are awaiting the rise of a dictator to come along and smash the rotten edifice of democracy sometime this century.



Spengler thought Democracy was the form of government of a civilization in decline

Spengler on Democracy

Spengler did not have a very high opinion of democracy. He believed it was the form of government of a civilization in decline, and interestingly the idea of mass democracy arrived in the Winter of Faustian/Western Civilization. Spengler viewed democracy as a weapon of moneyed interests, who use the media to create the illusion that there is consent from the governed. To him, the notion of democracy is really no different than living under a plutocracy (government by a wealthy elite.) Using the media’s propaganda, money is turned into force and controls people’s lives.

The leftist causes that have dominated the last century, such as equalism, feminism, and Socialism, to Spengler, were only tools used to assist the moneyed powers to be more effective.

The decline is also marked by increasingly authoritarian leaders as the democracy breaks down. Monetary powers permeate the government, eventually destroying it. This is where we currently are on Spengler’s timeline, which leads to what Spengler expects will happen in the West: The rise of a a Caesar as democracy, dominated by money, crumbles under its own corruption. People will cease to participate in elections, and the best candidates will remove themselves from politics. Spengler thinks blood is the only force that can conquer the force of money.

A New Spring After the Winter?

Spengler’s predictions of decline, as prescient as they have been over the last century, may leave you feeling a sense of hopelessness after studying his work. However, as one culture and civilization fades away, it’s very likely another will arise as part of this organic cycle.

John David Gebser later studied Spengler’s work, and believes a new consciousness will emerge from the ashes of the old civilization. Just as Western civilization was built upon the ashes of Ancient Greece and Rome, a new civilization may well be built on the ashes of our own.

The Decline of the West, published in 1918 and largely unknown today, is work that very well could be among the greatest ideas ever conceived by the human mind. It smashes the linear model of history (always moving upward) presented in the public school system, and instead presents the idea that throughout history man and his civilizations go through periods of birth, growth, decline, and death.

Friday, February 12, 2016

Zika Virus A Hoax?

Zika HOAX exposed by South American doctors: Brain deformations caused by larvicide chemical linked to Monsanto; GM mosquitoes a 'total failure'

Thursday, February 11, 2016
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger


(NaturalNews) Despite all the public hoopla, all the cases of microcephaly being discovered in Brazil have never been scientifically linked to the Zika virus. A group of doctors from South America are now saying the brain deformations the world is witnessing are caused by the mass fumigation of low-income Brazilian people with a chemical larvicide, not by mosquitoes carrying the Zika virus.

What we're seeing with the brain deformations of children, in other words, is more like the history of thalidomide, a prescription medicine given to pregnant women that caused children to be born with limbs missing. But the official narrative on all this is pushing a false link with Zika in order to justify more chemical fumigation, more vaccines and more genetically engineered mosquitoes.

From the doctors at Red Universitaria de Ambiente y Salud (the Red University of Environment and Health), with h/t to GM Watch: (SOURCE document)

A dramatic increase of congenital malformations, especially microcephaly in newborns, was detected and quickly linked to the Zika virus by the Brazilian Ministry of Health. However, they fail to recognise that in the area where most sick persons live, a chemical larvicide producing malformations in mosquitoes has been applied for 18 months, and that this poison (pyroproxyfen) is applied by the State on drinking water used by the affected population.

It looks like the world's health authorities are using Zika virus mosquitoes as a cover story to conceal the damage caused by toxic chemicals manufactured by powerful globalist corporations.

The larvicide sprayed in Brazil, for example, is called "pyriproxyfen," and it's manufactured by Sumitomo Chemical, a corporation known to be a "strategic partner" of Monsanto. The Argentinian doctors' report lists Sumitomo as a "subsidiary" of Monsanto. As GM Watch reports, "Pyriproxyfen is a growth inhibitor of mosquito larvae, which alters the development process from larva to pupa to adult, thus generating malformations in developing mosquitoes and killing or disabling them."

Hmmm... a growth inhibitor of developing organisms? Does that raise any question marks with anyone when considering the under-developed cranial and neurological systems of the children being victimized in all this?

From the report:

Malformations detected in thousands of children from pregnant women living in areas where the Brazilian state added pyriproxyfen to drinking water is not a coincidence, even though the Ministry of Health places a direct blame on Zika virus for this damage, while trying to ignore its responsibility and ruling out the hypothesis of direct and cumulative chemical damage caused by years of endocrine and immunological disruption of the affected population. Doctors from the Brazilian Association for Collective Health (ABRASCO) demand that urgent epidemiological studies taking into account this causal link be carried out, especially when among 3,893 cases of malformations confirmed until January 20, 2016, 49 children have died and only five of them were confirmed to have been infected with Zika.


Zika virus doesn't cause microcephaly!As reported by the Argentinian doctors in their report, Zika virus has never been known to cause brain deformations in children:

Previous Zika epidemics did not cause birth defects in newborns, despite infecting 75% of the population in those countries. Also, in other countries such as Colombia there are no records of microcephaly; however, there are plenty of Zika cases.

The entire reason these brain deformations are being blamed on the Zika virus, we're now learning, is so that powerful chemical companies can sell more toxic chemicals that poison the people and the environment even more! From the doctors' report:

Brazilian doctors (Abrasco) are claiming that the strategy of chemical control is contaminating the environment as well as people, that it is not decreasing the amount of mosquitoes, and that this strategy is in fact a commercial manoeuvre from the chemical poisons industry, deeply integrated into Latin American ministries of health as well as WHO and PAHO.

It's a vicious cycle, of course: The government sprays chemicals that cause brain deformations in children, but in order to avoid blaming the chemicals, they blame mosquitoes, thereby demanding MORE toxic chemicals be sprayed, causing yet more deformations that demand yet more chemicals and so on.

If all this sounds familiar, it's because it's ripped right out of the playbook of the vaccine industry: Many vaccines actually cause epidemics (which is why children who are stricken with measles and mumps have almost always been previously vaccinated against measles and mumps), thereby increasing public demand for more vaccines which cause more outbreaks, ad infinitum.

It's the perfect business model: When your product causes an epidemic of disease or birth defects, just find something else to blame and then pay off all the government health authorities to demand more of your product! After all, even the CDC loves these pandemics because it gives them an opportunity to exhibit more "authority" and push for more vaccines.


Billions already pledged to the vaccine industry... even with no scientific evidence of a linkBased entirely on fraudulent information and quack science, President Obama has now called for $1.8 billion in government handouts to vaccine companies and pharmaceutical corporations to combat Zika. Yet the linkage between Zika and microcephaly is nothing but an unproven, unscientific, mythological narrative dreamed up by the vaccine pushers. It carries the same scientific weight as saying "Black cats cause bad luck" or "Rubbing a rabbit's foot gives me good luck."

Hence the term "vaccine voodoo" which is a technically accurate description of the total lack of science underpinning the fraudulent vaccine industry. Isn't it amazing how quickly the government, the media and the vaccine pushers have leaped to their preferred conclusion about microcephaly even without a shred of scientific evidence to support such a notion?

(Hey, it's a pandemic... they don't need any real EVIDENCE, right?)


Genetically engineered mosquitoes aren't working eitherWhen bad science and dangerous chemicals are already destroying people's lives, the solution must be MORE bad science, right?

Enter genetically engineered mosquitoes. According to all the criminally insane GMO pushers, GM mosquitoes are the instant answer to mosquito-borne diseases (and nothing can ever go wrong, we're assured).

The problem is that they're criminally insane and scientifically illiterate to boot. That's why the GM mosquitoes aren't working. "The last strategy deployed in Brazil, and which might be replicated in all our countries, is the use of GM mosquitoes -- a total failure, except for the company supplying mosquitoes," say the Argentinian doctors.

The English company Oxitec sells male GM mosquitoes, supposedly in order to decrease the Aedes population. A lethal gene is inserted in those mosquitoes, which is transmitted to the offspring, causing death to larvae if it is not blocked by an antibiotic (tetracycline).

Currently in Brazil nearly 15 million GM mosquitoes have been released, and the failure is complete. Where field tests were carried out, less than 15% of larvae were transgenic, that is to say... wild females are not accepting the English mosquito from Oxitec. The response: increasing the release in poor areas. Also, we must take into account that the biology of the disease shows that the female only "stings" when it's pregnant and generating eggs after being fertilised by a male; it does it in that state and only then, because it needs blood components in order to develop the eggs. So, if millions of male mosquitoes are released, there will be many more fertilised females looking to suck the blood of mammals, thus increasing the spreading of the disease from infected people to healthy people!


A massive science hoax, vaccine hoax and chemical hoax all designed to generate more industry profits while ignoring the true causes of suffering in Brazilian childrenOnce you put all the pieces of this puzzle together, it becomes crystal clear: The Zika virus narrative is a massive quack science hoax that's being pushed solely to sell more chemicals, more GM mosquitoes, more vaccines and more fumigation of the Brazilian population with deadly substances.

The real cause of microcephaly is being systematically ignored, lending yet more support to the idea that this is all part of the population control agenda to poison the people of Brazil, deliberately reduce their offspring to mutants, increase abortions and demand that women no longer get pregnant.

All the signs are there, folks. This is the Bill Gates human depopulation agenda in full swing, disguised as a mosquito virus outbreak. It's no mistake that the larvicide chemicals are being sprayed in the poorest areas of Brazil, targeting those very same populations that are now being told, "Don't have any more babies!"

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/052943_Zika_virus_hoax_larvacide_chemical_GM_mosquitoes.html#ixzz3zyaxtkbn

Thursday, February 11, 2016

McAfee For President!!

JOHN MCAFEE: OBAMA ADMIN. TOO INCOMPETENT TO IMPLEMENT CYBERSECURITY
Security expert speaks out on Obama's $19 billion cybersecurity program
Kit Daniels | Infowars.com - FEBRUARY 10, 2016

President Obama’s $19 billion cybersecurity program, in which the president will appoint a ‘Cyber Czar,’ will end in failure if implemented, according to cybersecurity expert John McAfee.

After years of ignoring the cybersecurity issue, the president announced his billion-dollar ‘Cybersecurity National Action Plan’ on Tuesday to “to enhance cybersecurity awareness and protections” and “maintain public safety as well as economic and national security,” but McAfee pointed out a major hole in the president’s proposal.


“Basically the government as it exists is too incompetent to implement such as thing,” McAfee said in a phone interview. “They don’t have the people.”

Obama unveiled his $19 billion cybersecurity proposal, including $3.1 billion to replace older computers, as part of his 2017 budget request.


McAfee, who’s perhaps best known for developing the first commercial anti-virus program, is running for the Libertarian Party presidential nomination to highlight the public’s need for cybersecurity amid government surveillance, especially after U.S. intelligence director James Clapper said the NSA and other agencies will use Internet-connected, “smart” household appliances to spy on Americans.

“What I bring to the Libertarian Party is cybersecurity, which in their platform is not even mentioned although it’s probably the number one thing right now,” McAfee said. “I think cybersecurity is the greatest issue that we have today because the next war is not going to be fought primarily with bombs, battleships and airplanes but with someone in China pushing a button and our infrastrure instantly disappears.”

“We won’t have any power, emergency services… food production will end and with it food distribution.”

“It’s a monumental problem and it’s right on the horizon,” he added. “So that’s why the Libertarian Party: they bring me ballot access and I bring them into the modern age of technology.”

Wednesday, February 10, 2016

Ron Paul: Why I Have Hope

RON PAUL: WHY I HAVE HOPE

The far left: very intolerant and want armed feds to tell other people how to live
Ron Paul | Mises.org - FEBRUARY 10, 2016

I think the most exciting message for me today is that things are changing.

Often, when I come to these events, people ask me, “isn’t this grueling, isn’t this very tough?” It’s not, though, and it’s actually a little bit selfish on my part, because I get energized when I meet all the young people here. It’s true there is a spread of ages here, but there are a lot of young people and some of them even come up to me and say “you introduced me to these ideas when I was in high school a few years ago.”

And it’s not just people at events like these. When I landed at the airport on my way here, I was approached by two young people who came up to talk to me. They didn’t know each other, but both spoke with foreign accents, and both said they were from Africa. They said they heard the message of liberty over the Internet, and they had been following me ever since 2008.


Positive Trends

These are just examples, but I do think they represent a larger change that is taking place right now. Things are changing dramatically and in a favorable way.

We’re in this transition period right now where the attitudes are changing. But our views have been out there a long time, so we have to ask ourselves why we’re seeing more success now among the young and many future leaders.

Part of this is just due to greater availability of ideas. The Internet certainly helps, and a lot of the credit must go to organizations like the Mises Institute that make the ideas of liberty more easily available to everyone.

I also never imagined that my presidential campaigns would get the attention they did for our ideas. Our success in bringing new young people into the movement surpassed anything I thought was possible.

Change Will Come Whether We Like It or Not

But the reason we see more success for these ideas is not just because it’s easier to find them and read them. We’re living in a time when people — especially young people — can see that the old ideas aren’t working any more.

The young generation has inherited a mess from the older generations, and the young can see that what they’ve been told isn’t true. It’s not true that you can just go to college, run up a bunch of student debt, and then get a good job. The young can see that the middle class is being destroyed by our current economic system. And they can see that our foreign policy is failing.

Whether we like it or not, change will come. The troops will come home. They probably won’t come home for ideological reasons, but simply because the United States is broke and can’t afford all its wars anymore.

We’re also living in a time when the economic system is going to come unglued. The old Keynesian economic system isn’t working and young people can see it.

If it is true that we’re in the midst of an end of an era, though, the question remains as to what’s going to replace the system we have now. There are still plenty of socialists — popular ones — who are out there saying that what we need is more government control and more war to fix the economy and the world. So, we still have a lot of work to do, but I think we’re in a better place now than we’ve been in a long time.

We Don’t Need a Majority

When thinking about all the work we still have to do, it’s important to keep in mind that we don’t need majority support. If you’re waiting for 51 percent of the population to say “I’m libertarian and I believe everything you say,” you’ll lose your mind. What we need for success is intellectual leadership in a country that can influence government and the society overall.

That’s where the progress is being made. We’re only talking about 7 or 8 percent of a country that is necessary to provide the kind of influence you need. This was the case during the American Revolution, and it’s true today. You are part of that 8 percent.

When doing this work, though, there are many things that can be done. People often ask me “what do you want me to do.” My answer is: “do what you want to do.”

There is no one way. Some people can use the political system, and others can go into pure education. Lew Rockwell started the Mises Institute, but what you do for the cause of liberty is personal to you, and you have to find what makes sense for you.

Also, you can’t know all the positive effects your work is having. I certainly had no way of knowing all these years how I was having an effect on those young Africans I met at the airport. You can’t always know what effect you’re having either.

Where To Start

So, say that we are successful, and our 7 or 8 percent continues to gain influence. What should we be doing? I think there are three basic places we need to start.

First off, we would see to it that there would be no income tax in the United States ever again.

Second, we would take the Federal Reserve and all its leadership and relegate them to the pages of history.

We would then pass a law that the US government cannot commit any crime that it punished other people for. It’s wrong to steal and hand people’s property over to other people, no matter how much people who do that win the applause of others.

And finally, we would bring all the troops home. Randolph Bourne was right when he said that war is the health of the state. Peace is the friend of liberty and prosperity.

We Need Humility

As a final note, I’d like to say that humility and tolerance need to be an important part of our efforts.

Yes, we need a foreign policy based on humility. We can’t know what’s right for people around the world, and we certainly shouldn’t force anything on them.

But right here at home, we need humility also. In fact, libertarianism is based on humility. We can’t know what’s best for other people. No one can, and that is why we want people to have the freedom to do what they think is best for themselves.

This is true in economics, of course. Do you think Janet Yellen knows what the “correct” interest rate is? There are many things that economic planners can’t possibly know. And for that reason — and others — there are so many things they shouldn’t be doing.

And yes, there are a lot of people out there living their lives in ways we might disagree with. But intolerance is what government is based on. The far left, they are very intolerant and are happy to have people with guns tell other people how to live.

We need to keep in mind that if other people aren’t hurting us or using government to force their way of life on us, they should be left alone.

Unlike the left, we want tolerance for other people’s morals and for how other people work for a living and what they choose to do with their money.

We need more tolerance and humility in every aspect of life, and that’s how we get a free society.

So, let’s all go to work and preserve the cause of liberty.

Thank you very much.

Tuesday, February 9, 2016

Lew Rockwell: The Truth About Trump

LEW ROCKWELL: THE TRUTH ABOUT TRUMP

Top libertarian talks about Trump and the rise of populism, the cashless society and martial law

Kit Daniels | Infowars.com - FEBRUARY 7, 2016


In this exclusive interview, world-renowned libertarian Lew Rockwell, the co-founder of the Mises Institute and Ron Paul’s former congressional chief of staff, speaks about Donald Trump and the rise of populism, the economic collapse, the cashless society, martial law and his late friend Murray Rothbard, the founder of anarcho-capitalism.

Monday, February 8, 2016

Ron Paul: Cruz Isn't A Libertarian

RON PAUL: CRUZ ISN’T A LIBERTARIAN

Former congressman points out Cruz's ties to Goldman Sachs

Infowars Nightly News - FEBRUARY 6, 2016
“You take a guy like Cruz, people are liking the Cruz — they think he’s for the free market, and [in reality] he’s owned by Goldman Sachs,” Paul said of the Texas senator on Fox Business’ Varney & Company.

Friday, February 5, 2016

The Truth About Politics

THE TRUTH ABOUT POLITICS

Even the “free societies” of the West amount to some people ruling, and others being ruled
Lew Rockwell | Mises.org - FEBRUARY 5, 2016

The very first votes of the 2016 presidential election season were cast this week in the Iowa caucuses.

This is supposed to fill us with happy thoughts about self-government, civic virtue, rational deliberation, and about politics as the way the people’s will is put into effect.

But to the contrary, we should spurn what the establishment would have us celebrate. Politics operates according to principles that would horrify us if we observed them in our private lives, and that would get us arrested if we tried to live by them. The state can steal and call it taxation, kidnap and call it conscription, kill and call it war.


And yet we are taught to fear capitalism, of all things.

But what, after all, are capitalism and the free market? They are nothing more than the sum total of voluntary exchanges in society.

When we engage in a voluntary exchange — when I buy apples for $5, or when you hire someone for $25 per hour — both sides are better off than they would have been in the absence of the exchange.

We can’t say the same for our interactions with the state, since we pay the state under threat of violence. The state sure winds up better off, though. That’s for sure.

Business firms that increase their profits thanks to some new innovation cannot rest on their laurels. Other firms will adopt the innovation themselves, and those abnormally high profits will dissipate. The original firm must continue to press forward, striving to devise still newer ways to please their fellow men.

The state operates under no such conditions. It can remain as backward as it likes. Other firms are typically prohibited from competing with it.

The state’s priorities arbitrarily override your own. Ethanol “is important for the farmers,” one candidate says. So because the state has decided some interest group’s foolish and economically nonsensical pet project is “important,” what you yourself would have preferred to do with your money is simply set aside and ignored, and you are forced to subsidize what the state seeks to privilege.

Our schools and media portray corporations as sinister, and government as benign. But who wouldn’t rather take a sales call from Norwegian Cruise Line than an audit demand from the Internal Revenue Service?

Or imagine if a corporation fabricated a web of untruths, used them as a pretext to launch a violent attack on a people that had never caused Americans any harm, and brought about as many as a million deaths and millions more internal and external refugees. That corporation would be broken up and never heard from again. It would be denounced ceaselessly until the end of time.

Now all those things did happen, but they were carried out by the state. And as we all know, there have been no repercussions for anyone. No one has been punished. In fact, the perpetrators earn six-figure speaking fees. The whole thing is shrugged off as at worst an honest mistake. Some people are still outraged about it, but even they seem to take for granted that there’s really nothing that can be done about behavior like this on the part of the American regime.

Imagine there were a corporation that was somehow so entrenched that despite being responsible for a staggering death toll, it evaded all responsibility and simply carried on as before. The outrage would be deafening and overwhelming.

But so relentless has been the propaganda, ever since all of us were children, about the state’s benign nature that many people simply cannot bring themselves to think as badly about the state as they have been taught to think about corporations — even though the crimes of the state put to shame all the misdeeds of all existing corporations put together. Meanwhile, opponents of the state are routinely portrayed as incorrigible misanthropes, when in fact, in light of the state’s true nature, we are mankind’s greatest advocates.

The market brings people together. People of divergent and sometimes antagonistic racial, religious, and philosophical backgrounds are happy to trade with one another. Beyond that, the international division of labor as it exists today is the greatest and most extraordinary example of human cooperation in the history of the world. Countless firms produce countless intermediate goods that eventually combine to become finished consumer products. And the entire structure of production, in all its complexity, is aimed at satisfying consumer preferences as effectively as possible.

The state, on the other hand, pits us against each other. If one of us wins a state favor, it comes at the expense of everyone else. For one group to be benefited, another must first be expropriated. At one time or another the state has pitted the old against the young, blacks against whites, the poor against the rich, the industrialists against agriculture, women against men.

Meanwhile, all the anti-social effort devoted to extracting favors from the state is effort that is not available to produce goods and services and increase the general prosperity.

The market is about anticipating the needs of our fellow men and exerting ourselves to meet those needs in the most cost-effective manner — in other words, by wasting the fewest possible resources, and making what we offer as affordable as we can for those we serve.

Ah, but we need the state, virtually everyone tells us. Whether it’s “monopoly,” or drugs, the bad guys overseas, or the scores of other bogeymen the state uses to justify itself, we’re constantly being reminded of why the state is supposed to be indispensable. To be sure, these and other rationales for the state sound plausible enough, which is why the state and its apologists use them. But the first halting steps toward intellectual liberation come when someone considers the possibility that the truth about these things might be different from what he hears on TV, or learned in school.

The small minority of people who administer the state with funds expropriated by the productive private sector need to justify this situation, lest the public become restless or entertain subversive ideas about the real relationship between the state and themselves. And this is where the state’s various platitudes about the people governing themselves, or taxation being voluntary, or government employees being the servants of the people, enter the picture.

Think for a moment just about this last claim: that government employees are our servants. These people staff an institution that decides how much of our income and wealth to expropriate in order to fund itself. They will imprison us if we do not pay. And we are to believe that these people are our servants?

For those not gullible enough to fall for such a transparent canard, the rationales become mildly more sophisticated. All right, all right, the state may say, it’s not quite right to say that the people govern themselves. But, they hasten to add, we can offer the next best thing: the people will be represented by individuals chosen from among them.

As Gerard Casey has argued, though, the idea of political representation is not meaningful. When an agent represents a business owner in a negotiation, he ensures that the owner’s interests are pursued. If the owner’s interests are defended only weakly, ignored, or downright defied, the owner chooses different representation.

None of this bears any resemblance to political representation. Here, a so-called representative is chosen by some people but actively opposed by others. Yet he is said to “represent” all of them. But how can this be, when he can’t possibly know them all, and even if he did, he’d discover they have mutually exclusive views and priorities?

Even if we focus entirely on those people who did vote for the representative, is their vote supposed to imply consent to his every decision? Some of them may have voted for him not for his positions or merits, but simply because he was less bad than the alternative. Others may have chosen him for one or two of his stances, but may be indifferent or hostile on everything else. How can even these people — who actually voted for the representative — seriously be said to be “represented” by him?

But the idea of political representation, while meaningless, is not without its usefulness to the modern state. It helps to conceal the brute fact that, despite all the talk about “popular rule” and “governing ourselves,” even the “free societies” of the West amount to some people ruling, and others being ruled.

When the results are announced this primary season amid cheers and celebration, then, remember what it all represents: the triumph of compulsion over cooperation, coercion over freedom, and propaganda over truth. The civics textbooks may write with breathless awe about the American political system, but this is by far the worst thing about the US. Rather than celebrate the anti-social world of politics, let us raise a glass to the anti-politics of the free market, which has yielded more wealth and prosperity through peace and cooperation than the state and its politicians could with all the coercion in the world.

Owner Of The Zika Virus Exposed

OWNER OF THE ZIKA VIRUS EXPOSED

We've all heard about the Zika virus, but what's behind it's rapid growth?

The Alex Jones Show - FEBRUARY 4, 2016

Alex Jones and Dr. Edward Group discuss who the patent holder for the Zika virus is.


Alex Jones and Dr. Edward Group discuss the origins of the horrifying Zika virus and the truth behind it’s recent surge.

Thursday, February 4, 2016

The Relationship Between The Treasury And The Fed

THE COZY RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TREASURY AND THE FED

Fed finishes its most profitable year on record
David Howden | Mises.org - FEBRUARY 4, 2016

Last year was a tough one for investors.

Gold was down 10 percent. The Dow Industrials fell 2.5 percent, and most bond indexes finished down by at least that much.

One institution that performed remarkably well in 2015 was the Federal Reserve. It just finished its most profitable year on record. The $100 billion in net income earned last year was a slight improvement over the previous year. That total was also roughly three times higher than the Fed’s income from 2007, the last year before it initiated its Quantitative Easing programs in the wake of the financial crisis.


Since the Fed does not exist to generate profits, some may be confused as to how it could have such a great year at doing so.

Here’s how it works. Every time the Fed expands the money supply it buys an asset. Typically the asset is a financial security, like a US Treasury bond, and the counterparties are typically large banks. Figure 1 gives a simplified look at the Fed’s balance sheet at the end of 2015 and how it evolved over the year:

Figure 1: Simplified Federal Reserve Balance Sheet (in millions of dollars)

Compared to previous years, 2015 was relatively uneventful at the Fed. Having completed the tapering of its Quantitative Easing programs in October 2014, the Fed’s asset holdings held constant over the year. This was in stark contrast to the previous six years, during which the Fed purchased $3.5 trillion of assets. The Fed earns interest on its assets but most of its liabilities are non-interest bearing, like the $1.4 trillion worth of Federal Reserve notes crumpled in people’s pockets or buried under our mattresses. The Fed does pay interest on Reserve Bank balances, but at the current rate of 0.5 percent, this figure was a drop in the bucket relative to its total income. (Almost all of the Fed’s assets earn interest, while it incurs an interest expense on less than half of its liabilities.
What Does the Fed Do With All That Income?

The question that arises is what the Fed does with its profits.

Each year, the Fed remits to the US Treasury its net income, and thus provides the federal government with an important source of funding. Figure 2 shows how this figure has evolved since 2001.

Figure 2: Treasury Interest and Fed Remittances (in billions of dollars)

A decade ago, back when the Fed was a smaller size, Fed remittances were fairly steady, in the neighborhood of $20 billion a year. This all changed after 2008 as the Fed’s Quantitative Easing programs increased the amount of interest-earning assets that would generate funds to transfer back to the Treasury. This year’s figure of $97.7 billion is more than four times the amount transferred just ten years ago, an annual growth rate of more than 16 percent. (At least something is growing quickly in this economy.)
Big Bucks for the US Treasury

For the US Treasury, Fed remittances are something of a free lunch. When someone buys a Treasury bond, the government must pay them interest. This applies to the Fed as well, but then at year-end the Fed remits the interest back to the Treasury.

The federal government paid out $223 billion in interest payments last year. The Fed remitted almost $100 billion back, leaving the net interest expense at around $125 billion. It’s not just historically low interest rates that are making it easier for the Treasury to borrow in a way that, if it were done by anyone else, would classify them as subprime. The Fed is also chipping in and helping out where it can.

Also shown in figure 2 is the percentage of the federal interest expense that is remitted back by the Fed. For 2015, this figure neared 45 percent. That figure is a good way to think about the free lunch that the Fed gives to the Treasury.

In more “normal” times (i.e., prior to 2008) around 10 to 15 percent of the Treasury’s interest payments were paid back to it by the Fed. This figure has grown to almost four times that amount over the past seven years and it doesn’t look likr this trend will abate anytime soon.
Implications for Fed “Independence”

As much as economists talk about the independence that the Fed holds from Congress, these remittances represent a strong link. In fact, since they enable federal spending they create a form of quasi-fiscal policy for the Fed to use, in addition to its more common monetary policy options.

Consider that since Treasury debt is almost never repaid in net terms (old issues are retired but replaced with new debt issuances), the true cost of financing the US government’s borrowing is not the gross amount of debt outstanding but the annual interest expense it faces. Viewed this way, nearly half of the Treasury’s borrowing was financed by the Fed last year. Absent these Fed remittances, Congress would need to look at either an alternative funding source (though I am not sure how many takers there are for the Fed’s $2.5 trillion Treasury holdings) or make some serious cuts.

How serious? NASA’s operating budget was roughly $18 billion last year, so a lack of Fed remittances would cause the Treasury to cut around five NASA-sized programs. Alternatively, the governments Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (previously known as “food stamps”) cost $70 billion in 2014. Without the Fed’s remittances, Congress would have to stop paying out all food stamp recipients plus it would be forced to defund almost two NASAs.

More important in many Americans’ hearts is their monthly social security check. In 2014, $830 billion of social security checks were mailed out. Without Fed remittances, retirees might see their monthly check cut by about 12 percent.

For those concerned with the burgeoning size of the federal government, putting a stop to Fed remittances would put a serious dent in public finances and force some serious thought as to what programs need to be cut.

Wednesday, February 3, 2016

Ron Paul: Why Bernie Sanders Is Wrong

RON PAUL: WHY BERNIE SANDERS IS WRONG

...And why liberty isn't a compromise
Kit Daniels | Infowars.com - FEBRUARY 2, 2016

Socialists – and progressives in general – say they want more freedom from the state except when it comes to economics, as Dr. Ron Paul points out.

Grain Company Refuses To Buy Glyphosate Treated Oats

GRAIN COMPANY REFUSES TO BUY GLYPHOSATE-TREATED OATS, CITING CROP CONCERNS

Has suppliers sign anti-glyphosate contract
Christina Sarich | Infowars.com - FEBRUARY 2, 2016

After finding that growers who sprayed their grain crops with glyphosate ended up with an inferior product, Grain Millers, Inc. announced that it will avoid buying western Canadian oats that have been treated with the herbicide.

Procurement manager for Grain Millers, Inc., Terry Tyson confirmed that the company will only accept oats that have been allowed to mature naturally, either while still in the field, or in the swath (a holding place for harvested grain). He argued that use of glyphosate as a pre-harvest management product disrupts the natural maturation process and negatively affects starch development, resulting in lower quality flakes and flour.


Tyson explained:


“Last summer, in 2015, we introduced our new policy on the use of pre-harvest glyphosate, in effect banning that practice, (but) we had already taken a large position in the new crop market by that time so we are (phasing in the) policy this year.”

The company seems tone-cold serious about not buying grains that have been treated with glyphosate. All growers are required to sign an affidavit that prohibits pre-harvest glyphosate.

Though Grain Millers’ headquarters is in Minnesota, is buys oats primarily from Canadian growers, taking delivery in a facility in Yorkton, Sask. Many growers were caught off-guard when the company refused to purchase from them, and though their policy is controversial, they are standing by it.

Tyson said that Grain Millers’ decision to avoid glyphosate-treated oats had nothing to do with health issues or food safety concerns, but was about quality issues that the company noticed in its products about five years ago.

“Our policy is about functional performance.”

The company first scrutinized its processing systems and then looked into external factors such varietal characteristics, fungicide use and chemical applications. They found an undeniable correlation between poor flake and flour quality and glyphosate use. These findings were supported with laboratory analysis.

Tyson said:



“The early use of glyphosate as a desiccant really doesn’t allow the plant to mature. It kills the oat plant, and the results are comparable to an early freeze. It doesn’t continue to mature like it would in the swath. That prevents the starch … from maturing, and immature starch makes poor quality flakes and flour.”

The use of glyphosate before harvest is argued to negatively affect maturation, hurting beta glucan production, a key nutritional attribute of oats which promote heart and cardiovascular health.

Willie Zuchkan, an oat grower from east-central Saskatchewan and former chair of SaskOats, said the loss of glyphosate as a pre-harvest management tool will present a challenge, as he believes it is effective for weed-control.


“It’s going to be an adjustment because glyphosate was very valuable for weed control,” Zuchkan said.

“But if it’s causing a problem at Grain Millers, then I guess we’ll have to swath the crop versus trying to desiccate and straight cut it, or we’ll have to wait for it to be dead ripe and then straight cut it.”

This article originally appeared at Natural Society.