No matter what your convictions in life, nobody wants to get old and yucky. I found some good advice recently on the top things to do or not do to delay turning into your aunt Mildred.
AVOID:
1- Free Radicals: You get these from things like cigarettes, trans fats and charred meat.
2- Imflammation: This makes you get old and sick. You can reduce it by exercising and eating things like Turmeric, dark chocolate and resveratrol, which you find in good quality red wine.
3-Glycation. This happens when sugar mixes with proteins and fats to form molecules that will put you in a nursing home. So don’t eat sugar or browned foods that were cooked with high heat. Sugar and fried foods will kill you.
4- Stress. This makes you produce hormones that will make you feel fried and burnt-out in the long run. You produce cortisol to mitigate the stress, but this will also kill you if it remains high over time. So you need to figure out how to de-compress, take the blue pill sometimes if you must, and get enough rest. They don’t call it beauty sleep for nothing. http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/08/17/fight-these-4-causes-of-aging.aspx
Also, getting fat makes you get sick, old and feel like crap. So don’t get fat. One of the best ways you can avoid this is by shunning fructose, aka fruit sugar, also known mostly as corn syrup, but it can come from a variety of sources including agave syrup. Fruit sugar…Will kill you.
According to Dr Mercola, more than 1/4 of Americans are now obese. http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/08/17/obesity-rates-keep-rising.aspx
In summary, the more cigarettes you smoke, the more chocolate you need to eat, but don’t eat so much that you get fat, or it will defeat the purpose.
Straight from the Federal Department of Insult to Injury:
The government is defending a project to build a mosque near ground zero. The impending erection of this building has naturally been casing a lot of controversy. This is, first of all, no ordinary mosque. According to Andrea Peyser of the New York Post, the Cordoba House, as it will be called, is to be a “Muslim house of worship, topped by a 13-story cultural center with a swimming pool, in a building damaged by the fuselage of a jet flown by extremists into the World Trade Center.
The opening date shall live in infamy: Sept. 11, 2011. The 10th anniversary of the day a hole was punched in the city’s heart.”
Now, we all know the NWO likes to get in your face, but isn’t this going a little too far?
A lot of the controversy has centered around whether those behind the project should be allowed to go ahead with their plans, given that everythng surrounding them is so highly offensive in light of what happened at the site on 9/11/2001. Some say they should have as much right to religious freedom as anyone else. Others say they should build their center somewhere else, out of common courtesy if nothing else. Comparisons to building a Japanese cultural center in Pearl Harbor have been drawn.
The American Center for Law & Justice in Washington then attempted to file a law suit to challenge the New York Landmarks Preservation Commission’s decision not to grant landmark status to the 1857 Italianate building that is currently on the site.
“This issue has nothing to do with religious freedom,” said Brett Joshpe, a lawyer for ACLJ. “Given what the (planned new) building represents, the placement of the project at that location is inappropriate and inflammatory.”
It seems that despite protest from citizens and even local government, the Cordoba Institute has some friends in high places. New York Congressman Peter King called for an investigation into the project’s funding in an apparent attempt to discover just who these friends are.
According to CNS News: “The group is headed by Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf. On Sept. 30, 2001, two weeks after the 9/11 attacks, Fiesal told CBS’ “60 Minutes,” “I wouldn’t say that the United States deserved what happened. But the United States’ policies were an accessory to the crime that happened.” http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/70234
Is the Cordoba Institute saying that the US government was in some way responsible for 9/11? Are they sympathizing with those who did it? Doesn’t this make their source of funding all the more relevant?
Surely, it is the government’s business, if they are funding it, though- isn’t it? Even indirectly? As it turns out, on August 18, 2010, the New York Post reported that Feisal Abdul Rauf, the Imam behind the project, was set to embark on a multi-country trip to the Middle East that was to be:
“funded by the State Department – raising concerns that taxpayers may be helping him with the controversial project’s $100 million fund-raising goal.” http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/feds_funding_zero_imam_mideast_trip_OTq9dmoHpxbaKvJbB4VLGM
He clearly has the backing and support of the government at the federal level. The federal government wants a 13-story mosque/cultural center to be erected at Ground Zero! What does that tell you? Who’s in your face now?
The NY Post article goes on to say that the Federal government has stipulated that Rauf is not permitted to engage in fundraising while on his trip, but they add that
” he also will collect money from Muslim and Arab nations around the world — raising the possibility his goodwill mission could help him build contacts in oil-rich states. ” http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/feds_funding_zero_imam_mideast_trip_OTq9dmoHpxbaKvJbB4VLGM#ixzz0x0Htj1BN
Around 9:00 am on August 17, 2010, Patrick Gray Sharp loaded a truck with fuel-soaked woodchips, road flares, gasoline and ammonium nitrate, drove it into the parking lot of the McKinney Public Safety Building and set it on fire. He then shouted something, perhaps to lure people out of the building, before retreating, heavily armed, into a nearby treeline, from where he then fired about 100 rounds of ammunition into the building before putting a bullet in his own head after having been shot in the arm by police.
McKinney Police Chief Doug Kowalski said Sharp’s actions were completely senseless and that although it appeared he had a carefully thought-out plan, they had no idea what his motive was.
The parents of Sharp’s roommate described him as a nice guy, not a violent person, and said this act was totally out of character for him. His roommate’s father, Bobby Cox, was quoted to have said,
“I’m numb. It doesn’t make any sense. That’s just not Patrick. Nothing makes any sense. This is not the guy we knew.”
Sharp had no criminal record, but had been a witness in some court cases. He had no history of any kind of instability. The only noteworthy thing about him was that he was a gun enthusiast who liked to do target practice and had voiced concern that the government would ban guns. Strangely, he had quit his job shortly before he went on the rampage, although he had recently been transfered to a new post withing the company and had told his roomate’s parents that he liked his new job.
So, how does this make any sense? Was it ‘suicide by cop’, as local law enforcement proposed? Why would he go through all this trouble to try to get the police to kill him, if was willing to shoot himself in the head after all?
A suicidal person or a maniacal terrorist usually fits some kind of established profile. Had he been suicidal, one would expect him to have had some kind of serious problems, be battling depression, have recently been fired or dumped by his girfriend- but none of this applied. A man who goes on a sudden killing spree would be expected to have shown some signs of instability- maybe a history of outbursts of rage, a strange personality, something to give an indication that his thinking was weird. Like the guy who tried to attack the White House to get at the imaginary ‘ruby sattelite’. A terrorist would have to have some political motivations and probably some kind of association with a known extremist religious or political activism group. Something. Anything. But here there is nothing. None of what Sharp did makes any sense- unless you look at it from the point of view of him being a CIA sleeper, a programmed assassin who does not even know he has been programmed.
I realize this sounds far-fetched to most people, and I’m not saying
he was definitely a ‘sleeper’, just that he fits the bill and would have made a good candidate if ever there was one. Below is a link to an account written by someone who claims he was abducted and subjected to torture and post-hypnotic suggestion, implanted with the command to kill himself should he find a gun in his pocket, and to kill a doctor with his/her stethoscope should he find himself in a room alone with a such a doctor. Because of his knowledge of mind-control techniques, the author, Matthew P., was able to over-ride the process, fight the programming and remember the experience. http://rabble.ca/comment/1142549/Sleeper-Agent-Technology
Matthew P. says he was lured to a van by police under the pretense that they had some questions for him regarding an RCMP Major Crimes investigation. Once inside, he was drugged with phenobarbitol and subjected to torture and mind-control suggestions over a period of three hours.
Is it possible that Sharp had at some point been lured into such a van as well, possibly to answer questions about a crime? He had, after all been a court witness.
But why Sharp? Who would benefit from this? As I mentioned, Sharp was a gun enthusiast and a defender of the Second Ammendment. The government certainly has goals that involve restricting gun ownership and use, including possibly even complete or near complete disarmament of the public. Using a man like Sharp to carry out such a violent act involving firearms could certainly be used to further the agenda of those who wish to disarm the public.
Creating Manchurian candidates probably sounds to most like something that belongs in the moves, but as we can see from Matthew P.’s description, it is really not all that time-consuming or complicated.
There have been several such strange incidents in recent months and years: the man who decapitated a guy on a bus in Canada, John Bedell who tried to gain access to the White House to go on a shooting spree with a gun that had previously been in police custody, and even Abdulmutallab, the ‘undie bomber’ who lit a kind of firecracker in his underwear while on a flight due to land in the US. These were all bizzare, random high-profile crimes that benefited the police state in different ways at key times. Both the undie bomber and the bus butcher were described as having a completely blank look on their faces, even when Abdulmutallab’s crotch was on fire. One witness described him as being ‘in a trance’. People who knew the man who commited the decapitation was he was mild-mannered and normal and this was completely out of character for him. John Bedel was convenient associated with marijuana advocacy and 9/11 truth and had a history of mental illness. Sharp can now be associated with being a ‘gun nut’. Will the result of this be using this incident as another excuse to infringe on the American people’s right to keep and bear arms? If it is, it will just lend more credence to the possibility that Sharp was used intentionally and without his own knowlegde to further the agenda of the NWO.
In a publicity stunt to promote the Gulf Coast, Obama enlisted his 9-year-old daughter to mislead the public. The pair took a 26-hour ‘vacation’ in Florida which included a purported dip in the Gulf of Mexico, documented only by White House photographers.
What’s next? Should we be expecting next year’s headlines to read, “President, Daughter Battling Mysterious Full-Body Cancer”?
Not likely, because here is the other half of the story: The Prez and his kid did not immerse themselves in the oil and Correxit-laden waters of the Gulf. Instead, they had their little swim inland, in waters that have been proven to be clean and safe. They are not complete fools, after all. That is a description they reserve for the members of the general public who buy into presidential publicity stunts.
Depopulation of Planet Earth – Despoblación del Planeta Tierra
“The Limits to Growth – The Club of Rome’s depopulation agenda exposed by Against Nature – The Television Program. – Agenda 21 – The Earth Summit http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_sociopol_depopu.htm
Matt Simmons has died at the age of 67. There are varying reports on the cause of death. According to the Digital Journal, it was a heart attack: “The controversial investment banker warned the Earth’s oil supply is running out and that Middle Eastern reserves are unreliable. The author passed away at 67.
Simmons died Sunday of a heart attack at his home in North Haven, Maine.” http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/295757
Yahoo News tells us he had a heart attack, and adds that he was possibly having some career trouble lately: “While Simmons’ views on peak oil were regarded as somewhat controversial, he drew even more attention for a June 9 interview with Fortune magazine, in which he predicted BP Plc would be driven bankrupt in “about a month” as the cleanup costs for the Gulf of Mexico oil spill mounted.
A week later, Simmons & Co International (SCI), the investment bank that Simmons founded in 1974, said it was cutting ties with its founder, who until that point had served as chairman emeritus.”
And here again, he drowned: “NORTH HAVEN, Maine — A former energy adviser to president George W. Bush and a founder of the Ocean Energy Institute from North Haven died Sunday.
According to the Knox County Sheriff’s Department, Matthew Simmons drowned around 10 p.m. Sunday on Salt Marsh Road.
Simmons founded the Ocean Energy Institute in 2007. The institute, based in Rockland, is “a think-tank and venture capital fund addressing the challenges of U.S. offshore renewable energy,” according to its website. “
Of course, it is possible that the heat from the hot tub raise his blood pressure, which brought on a heart attack, which then caused him to drown. But was it really a heart attack? And which came first, the drowning or the heart attack?
The following post on Current.com states that: “According to Corporate Media reports, he drowned in his hot tub at his summer home in Maine. Followed by a later report from the Medical Examiner that concludes ” Simmons was suffering from heart disease ” which might have been a contributing factor in his death.” http://current.com/111pn4c
But who would want to kill Matt Simmons? Let’s look at who he was and what he had done. Simmons was an energy investment banker and a ig proponent of peak oil theory. He had published a book entitled ‘Twilight in the Desert’ aout declining Saudi oil reserves and was founder and CEO of Simmons & Co. Investment firm. He criticized the oil industry and called for increased transparency. http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6831
More recently, he had crtiticized BP’s way of handling the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster and had contradicted BP and the MSM’s official accounts on the seriousness of the situation. He had stated that far more oil was floing from the leak than BP was admitting, as much as 100 000 to 150000 barrels a day and that if left unfixed it could continue to leak for as much as 30 years. He also claimed that there was an open hole in the sea floor that was causing crude to gush from a lake of oil underneath, that there were multiple leaks and that the live footage being shown was of only a small leak, not the main one. Basically, he had said that the disaster was much worse than BP was making it out to be and BP wasn’t doing anything proper to address it. Here you can see an interview he gave shortly before his death:
Who would have wanted Simmons dead? BP? The government? Someone else? Would it have been a matter of ‘national security’ to shut him up? Naturally, some people would entertain these hypotheses. And would it even be possible to murder him in a way that mimics a natural demise?
According to the following article from Fourwinds10.com, “According to Washington Post report on 4/2/1979, since 1950s, Office of Strategic Services (the World War II predecessor of the CIA) researched on methods to induce death (e.g. heart-attack, cancer) to knock off or assassinate their targets, so the targets appeared to die of natural causes. “The CIA project apparently started with an undated, unsigned note indicating concern about the vulnerability of US leaders to assassination by ‘natural causes’.”
(Source) “Assassination by ‘Natural Causes’ – CIA Considered Inducing Death”, WASHINGTON POST, 4/2/79 “
In addition to this, by 1987 the Russians apparently had a prototype for a weapon by which they could induce a heart attack in a goat from as far as 1km away, and the Pentagon had been working on similar projects since the 1960’s.
There are also drugs that can be used to induce cancer or heart attack, but the problem with these is that they may be detected during autopsy. For this reason, the military had prefered to focus on the use of radio-frequency weapons to induce heart attack and had developed such devices by the 1960’s according to “Wonder Weapons” by Douglas Pasternak, US NEWS & WORLD REPORT, (7 July 1997).
This is where things get even stranger and reality appears to overlap with the realm of science fiction. According to the Fourwinds10 article, the military also possesses the technology to make the assassins using such weapons not only invisible, but tiny as an ant and able to levitate. By deploying these agents to carry out their mission, they can completely evade detection. The origins of invisibility-creation for military purposes go as far back as WWII, when Albert Einstein helped the US forces to develop a technology that would enable a naval ship to not only disappear, but teleport to another location through the application of unified field theory. The Philadelphia Experiment involving the naval ship USS Eldridge was such an application. Although the ship disappeared from the harbor in Philadelphia and later reappeared intact, the experiment went horribly wrong when it came to the crew. Some of them went mad while others were found to be moleculary fused to the ship on their return, with as much as half their bodies embedded in the deck or other parts of the ship. The experiment was classified beyond Top Secret and all witnesses made to swear to silence. Nonetheless, information regarding the event came out via one man named Carlos Allende and a short documentary on this was eventually made by the History channel.
So was Matt Simmons simply the victim of poor health and a perilous hot tub, or was he the target of a tiny, invisible, levitating CIA assassing deploying a top secret radio-frequency weapon? While we may never know for sure, our biggest clue may be to wait and see if his assessments and predictions were right.
In the early days, mental health professionals who dealt with drug addiction hoped that sson a new vaccine would cure cocaine addiction. In 2000, a Phase I study at Yale used: The vaccine, TA-CD, is designed to generate drug-specific antibodies, which bind to cocaine and prevent it from traveling to the brain from the bloodstream. This neutralizes its psychoactive effect.
Inclusio criteria for the study was 30 days of abstinence, a desire to stop using and willingness to seek treatment. The study authors mentioned that the vaccine did not reduce cravings for cocaine, but simply interfered with its effect to produce a high. What they are being injected with is actually succinylnorcocaine linked to recombinant cholera toxin B-subunit protein. This means that the cocaine molecule is attached to the cholera toxin protein in order to trick the body into making antibodies against the cocaine along with the protein. To override the vaccine’s effects, it may be possible to take massive amounts of cocaine, but it is unlikely that addicts who are actively working to overcome their addiction would want to do that. http://www.biopsychiatry.com/cocaine/vaccine.htm
From this last statement, one would gather that either these scientists were being overly optimistic or they really just didn’t understand how addiction works. In any case, they knew this outcome was possible, but they played it down.
2004: BBC Headline States “Cocaine Vaccine Stops Addiction”
The vaccine is created by attaching the cocaine to a large protein molecule which is used to stimulate the body’s immune system to produce antibodies that recognise the drug.
(…)
Trials carried out in the US showed almost half of those given the TA-CD vaccine, developed by Xenova, were able to stay off the drug for six months.
Yes, it turns out that half these people were able to stay of cocaine for 6 months- which means it didn’t work so well for the other half, and who knows what heppened after the 6 months were up and they were out of treatment. Nonetheless, the scientists remained optimistic and the drug company had the MSM touting the benefits of their new wonder-drug, as usual. Of note, no reference is given to the actual study so readers can look at the data for themselves. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3804741.stm
Fast forward to 2010: Washington Post reports “Testing of Cocaine Vaccine Shows It Does Not Fully Blunt Cravings For The Drug’
Well, as we saw from the earlier reports, it was never designed to blunt cravings. And you kow what happened? According to the article, some of the addicts participating in a study of the vaccine started doing massive amounts of cocaine in hopes of overcoming its effects
That’s right, they just kept trying to get high even though it wasn’t working anymore. Now, that is not surprising, really, because that is what all addicts do once they get to a certain point, especially with cocaine, where tolerance develops very quickly and after te first hit off the crack pipe, you spend the rest of the night making yourself feel like crap hoping to catch the buzz you did with that first puff. The doctors at Yale mentioned that this could be a possibility back in 2000, but they forged ahead anyway and hoped for the best. The article goes on to elaborate that, Nobody overdosed, but some of them had 10 times more cocaine coursing through their systems than researchers had encountered before, according to Kosten. He said some of the addicts reported to researchers that they had gone broke buying cocaine from multiple drug dealers, hoping to find a variety that would get them high.
That’s not what I would call a success, heh heh. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/04/AR2010010402752.html
An article on the blog Addiction Inbox, entitled “Cocaine Vaccine Hits Snag’ gave us more details:
Of 115 addicts involved in the study, only 38 % produced sufficient antibodies to dull the effects of cocaine, Rachel Saslow of the Washington Post reported. And among the high-antibodies group, only 53 % stayed free of cocaine 50 % of the time. “Immunization did not achieve complete abstinence from cocaine use,” said Thomas Kosten of Baylor college of Medicine, one of the authors of the paper.
Not everyone produced ‘adequate antibodies’, and when they did, the vaccine mad a mediocre success rate. Nonetheless, “NIDA director Nora Volkow characterized the work as “a promising step toward an effective medical treatment for cocaine addiction,” with the proviso that “larger follow-up studies confirm its safety and efficacy.”
When you hear ‘safety and efficacy’- watch out! it means they are going full steam with this. Confirm safety? How can it be confirmed when studies so far have shown that a significant amount of recipients increased their cocaine use, risked overdose, and went broke in the process? Confirm efficacy? When only 38% of people ‘responded’ to it, and among those only 53% stayed clean 50% of the time? That amounts to what- 19% of people who received it being able to abstain half the time? In other words, 81% of participants failed to stay clean, which is equivalent to the success rate for most regular rehab centers. Is that really a success rate for the vaccine or is it roughly how many cocaine addicts would stay clean 50% of the time with standard treatment anyway? http://addiction-dirkh.blogspot.com/2010/01/cocaine-vaccine-hits-snag.html
Remeber that efficacy is n ot equivalent to effectiveness. Efficacy represents something you measure in the lab, such as antibodies. Effectiveness is how well the product succeeds in achieving the desired result in real life. For example, a flu vaccine that claims 90% efficacy, may translate to 35% effectiveness in terms of actually preventing you from catching the flu (and remember that, speaking of flu shots, only 5-15% of the population actually catches the flu in any given flu season, so 35% effectiveness means it has lowered your chance of getting sick by about 2-5%, but I digress…)
In a 2009 clinical trial on 109 methadone patients, 21 out of the 50% receiving the vaccine achieved purportedly adequate antibody levels. Of these, 45% had cocaine-free urine tests, vs 35% for the remaining 88 who eithe rreceived a placebo or did not develop high enough antibodies. That means that about 9/21 people in the high antibody group stayed off the coke for a few weeks. How anyone could create statistics and come to any kind of conclusions on the vaccine’s effectiveness when the sample size was so small is beyond me. I was taught in school that you can never talk about statistics unless you have a sample of at least 100 people. But this becomes an effective way for pharmaceutical companies to make data appear to work in their favor. For example, you take 200 people with lung cancer, give 50% chemo and 50% chemo +radiation, and if you have 10% 1-year survival in the chemo group and 11% in the chemo +radiationn group, you can claim that radiatio exteded survival by 10%. Really, this is a lot of nonsense. All you had was one extra person live a year, but it is enough for somebody to make a lot of money giving somebody some kind of additional useless treatment.
And so it seems to be with the cocaine vaccine. They overlook the obvious red flag that it doesn’t work for most people, works shabbily when it does, and even drives a sizeable number of recipients to increase their cocaine use to dangerous levels. But none of that would deter Big Pharma, whose priority is evidently profit, never mind at whose expense.
What is the role of birth registration in bringing about the enslavement of the population? When you register your child’s birth, you basically turn them over to the State as a perpetual debt-slave. In the process, you relinquish your natural rights as a parent and submit your child to the State’s authority and care. The State then conditionally gives back to you whatever rigts, obligations, and priviledges they see fit for you to have as the child’s legal guardian. This is the vehicle by which the State obtains the right to interfere with your child’s freedom and your own freedom as a parent and human being, to force you, if the State so decides, to vaccinate your child or submit it to the public education system. It is also the basis on which the State has the rigt to ‘provide services’ to your child or remove it from your custody.
Quote by Colonel Edward Mandel House
The following quote is attributed to Colonel Edward Mandel House. It outlines in detail the plans to be implemented in order to enslave the American people. In a private meeting with Woodrow Wilson (President 1913 – 1921), the Colonel was reported to have stated:
“Very soon, every American will be required to register their biological property (that’s you and your children) in a national system designed to keep track of the people and that will operate under the ancient system of pledging. By such methodology, we can compel people to submit to our agenda, which will affect our security as a charge back for our fiat paper currency. Every American will be forced to register or suffer being able to work and earn a living. They will be our chattels (property) and we will hold the security interest over them forever, by operation of the lawmerchant under the scheme of secured transactions. Americans, by unknowingly or unwittingly delivering the bills of lading (Birth Certificate) to us will be rendered bankrupt and insolvent, secured by their pledges. They will be stripped of their rights and given a commercial value designed to make us a profit and they will be none the wiser, for not one man in a million could ever figure our plans and, if by accident one or two should figure it out, we have in our arsenal plausible deniability. After all, this is the only logical way to fund government, by floating liens and debts to the registrants in the form of benefits and privileges. This will inevitably reap us huge profits beyond our wildest expectations and leave every American a contributor to this fraud, which we will call “Social Insurance.” Without realizing it, every American will unknowingly be our servant, however begrudgingly. The people will become helpless and without any hope for their redemption and we will employ the high office (presidency) of our dummy corporation (USA) to foment this plot against America.”
~Colonel Edward Mandell House
The Truther Girls' Blog 