War Veterans/Military Family Members Successfully Blockade Fort Hood Deployment to Iraq.
by Matthis Chiroux on Monday, August 23, 2010 at 7:54am
Aug. 23, 2010
KILLEEN, TX) - Five peace activists successfully blockaded six buses carrying Fort Hood Soldiers deploying to Iraq outside Fort Hood's Clarke gate this morning at around 4 a.m. While the activists took the width of Clarke Rd. and slowed the buses to a halt, police made no arrests, but instead beat the activists out of the streets using automatic weapons and police dogs so the deploying Soldiers could proceed.
Among those blockading were three veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and one military spouse. (See attached bios) The action, organized by a group calling themselves "Fort Hood Disobeys," was aimed at preventing the deployment of the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment Soldiers to what the veterans termed an illegal and immoral occupation.
While standing in the street, the activists held banners reading "Occupation is a Crime" and "Please Don't Make the Same Mistake We Did. RESIST NOW." From the TX HW-190 overpass, additional supporters attempted to hang larger banners that read, "Tell the Brass: 'KISS MY ASS' Your family needs you more" "Sick of Fighting Your Wars" and "Col. Allen [3 ACR Commander]: Do not deploy wounded Soldiers."
This latest deployment comes less than two weeks after President Obama announced the second end to combat operations in Iraq. FHD organizers denounced this as a lie, and pointed to the deployment of the 3rd ACR, a combat regiment, to Iraq as clear proof. They have stated they will continue to organize direct action in the Fort Hood community to oppose the wars as long as troops continue to deploy.
The action organizers have established a website at forthooddisobeys.blogspot.com where they will be posting statements, photographs and video from the actions as they become available during the next 48 hours. As well, for the length of the day, FHD ran live webcasts updating their supporters and depicting portions of the direct action. All live broadcasts from the day are archived at http://bit.ly/b1WEyv.
For more information or to arrange coverage of today's events, call 347-613-8964 or write to forthooddisobeys@hushmail.com. See attached bios for more information on those who participated in today's action.
------------------Participant Bios:------------------------
I am Bobby Whittenberg-James, a Marine veteran of the war against the people of Iraq, a Purple Heart recipient and a third generation military service member. I joined the Marines in June of 2003, believing the lies about weapons of mass destruction and an imminent threat to our safety. I have since come to learn that these wars and occupations do not keep the people of the United States or the Middle East safe, but instead serve the interests of politicians, capitalists and corporations; the ruling elite.
These unjust wars and occupations rob the people of Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen of their dignity and their right to self-determination and serve to make the people of both the Middle East and the United States less safe. They also serve to further destabilize a region that has suffered under the boot-heel of western colonialism for over a century. The US Empire also supports both financially and militarily the brutal apartheid regime that occupies Palestine. All of this is done in our name with our money, and I am here to say "Not in my name!"
The recent information leaks about the US Empire's wars lay bare their war crimes and crimes against humanity. We must face the truth, even if it makes us uncomfortable or shows us something about ourselves that we don't want to see. When we find the truth, we must respond accordingly. I will not be complicit in the killing of people. Since I do not believe that the government or the capitalists will end these wars, I will vote with my body.
Bobby Whittenberg-James
Disobedient
------------------------------
I am Crystal Colon. I was a sergeant in the Army for five years, stationed at Fort Hood the entire time, save two deployments to Iraq totaling 26 months. I was a Signal Support Systems Noncommissioned Officer, coordinating communications for various commands. I was honorably discharged in Jan., 2010, and have been organizing in the veterans peace movement ever since.
I first began to question the war in Iraq during my first deployment in '05-'06. After my friend Robbie was killed, I was very deeply affected. I started questioning why we were in Iraq. It felt like he had died for nothing. After returning from Iraq, I planned to leave the military. I was stop-lossed and forced to return to Iraq for 15 months, in total held beyond the length of my enlistment more than 450 days. Since leaving the military, I have been active with the veterans peace movement, speaking out about my experiences and supporting troops who refuse to fight.
I am doing this today because I can't allow this war in which I have fought to continue. I can't allow other Soldiers to make the same mistake I did, deploying in support of a war crime. As a veteran of Iraq, how could I not do this today? For the people I helped occupy, for the friends I lost and stilI have over there, for the Soldiers on those buses. How could I not do this today? I should have disobeyed. I should have never boarded those buses to Iraq. I wish someone had tried to stop me.
Crystal Colon
Disobedient
----------------------
I am Matthis Chiroux, former Army sergeant and War Resister. I was press-ganged into the Army by the Alabama Juvenile "Justice" System in 2002. While in the military, I occupied the nations of Japan and Germany for more than four years, with shorter tours in the Philippines and Afghanistan. I was a Public Affairs Noncommissioned Officer specializing in strategic communications. In reality, I was a propaganda artist. I was discharged honorably to the Individual Ready Reserve in 2007.
While I have always been against the war in Iraq, I began resisting it actively in 2008, after I received mobilization orders for a year-long deployment to Iraq. I refused those orders in Congress in May of 2008, calling my orders illegal and unconstitutional. I believed appealing to Congress would end the war. When 13 Members signed a letter of support for my decision and sent it to Bush, I thought we had won a victory for peace. This was more than two years ago. The president has changed, and the wars and destruction drag on.
Today, I am blocking the deployment of the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment with my fellow vets and military family members because the wars will continue to victimize our communities until we halt this bloody machine from within. I am putting my body on the line in solidarity with the people of the Middle East, whose bodies have been shot, burned, tortured, raped and violated by our men and women in and out of uniform. I cannot willfully allow Americans in uniform to put their lives and the lives of Iraqis in jeopardy for a crime. We are here because we have a responsibility to ourselves as veterans and as humans of the world. I will not rest until my people, ALL PEOPLE, are free.
In Struggle and Solidarity,
Matthis Chiroux
Disobedient
------------------------------
I am Cynthia Thomas, and I have been an Army Wife for 18 years. My husband has been deployed three times since the wars began. During his second deployment, he was severley wounded and medevaced to Walter Reed Army Hospital on Life Support. Even though he had Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Traumatic Brain Injury, suffered three fractures in his back, three fractures on his pelvis and countless other injuries, the Army deployed him a third time. This was devastating to our two daughters, our step-son and to me.
Three months after my husband deployed for the third time, our step-son called to inform me he was joining the Marines. That was the exact moment I realized that our children would be fighting these endless wars. I decided that I needed to start resisting.
The reason I am doing this today is because for the past 3 years that I have been speaking out and advocating for Soldiers, things have only gotten worse. I have heard countless stories from Vets and Active Duty Soldiers that give people nightmares. I have heard stories from family members that would shock people awake if they would just listen! Our military community is being destroyed!
If these wars are destroying our Soldiers and military families with 12 to 15-month, often repeat deployments, how do you think the Iraqi and Afghan people doing? They have been living these wars 24/7, 365 days a year for nearly a decade! My youngest daughter is an Operation Iraqi Freedom baby. She was less than one-year-old when her father left to invade Iraq. I look at her, and I see an Iraqi or Afghan child having to live in constant fear with no end in sight! I am doing this for our community, for my girls, for my husband and our Marine. I am doing this for the Iraqi and Afghan People. Enough is enough. If Soldiers really want to go fight, they'll have to go through me.
Cynthia Thomas
Disobedient
All five participants in the Fort Hood Disobeys blockade action. From left to right are Iraq Veterans Bobby Whittenberg-James and Crystal Colon, Jeff Grant, Military Spouse Cynthia Thomas and Afghanistan Veteran Matthis Chiroux.
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
The Truth About Modern Day Slavery and Torture
From http://uruknet.info/index.php?p=m61201&hd=&size=1&l=e
Obama and the Supremes Stand Up for Slavery
Chris Floyd
December 18, 2009While we were all out doing our Christmas shopping, the highest court in the land quietly put the kibosh on a few more of the remaining shards of human liberty. It happened earlier this week, in a discreet ruling that attracted almost no notice and took little time. In fact, our most august defenders of the Constitution did not have to exert themselves in the slightest to eviscerate not merely 220 years of Constitutional jurisprudence but also centuries of agonizing effort to lift civilization a few inches out of the blood-soaked mire that is our common human legacy. They just had to write a single sentence.Here's how the bad deal went down. After hearing passionate arguments from the Obama Administration, the Supreme Court acquiesced to the president's fervent request and, in a one-line ruling, let stand a lower court decision that declared torture an ordinary, expected consequence of military detention, while introducing a shocking new precedent for all future courts to follow: anyone who is arbitrarily declared a "suspected enemy combatant" by the president or his designated minions is no longer a "person." They will simply cease to exist as a legal entity. They will have no inherent rights, no human rights, no legal standing whatsoever -- save whatever modicum of process the government arbitrarily deigns to grant them from time to time, with its ever-shifting tribunals and show trials.This extraordinary ruling occasioned none of those deep-delving "process stories" that glut the pages of the New York Times, where the minutiae of policy-making or political gaming is examined in highly-spun, microscopic detail doled out by self-interested insiders. Obviously, giving government the power to render whole classes of people "unpersons" was not an interesting subject for our media arbiters. It was news that wasn't fit to print. Likewise, the ruling provoked no thundering editorials in the Washington Post, no savvy analysis from the high commentariat -- and needless to say, no outrage whatsoever from all our fierce defenders of individual liberty on the Right. But William Fisher noticed, and gave this report at Antiwar.com:
In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s refusal Monday to review a lower court’s dismissal of a case brought by four British former Guantanamo prisoners against former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld, the detainees’ lawyers charged Tuesday that the country’s highest court evidently believes that "torture and religious humiliation are permissible tools for a government to use."...Channeling their predecessors in the George W. Bush administration, Obama Justice Department lawyers argued in this case that there is no constitutional right not to be tortured or otherwise abused in a U.S. prison abroad.The Obama administration had asked the court not to hear the case. By agreeing, the court let stand an earlier opinion by the D.C. Circuit Court, which found that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act – a statute that applies by its terms to all "persons" – did not apply to detainees at Guantanamo, effectively ruling that the detainees are not persons at all for purposes of U.S. law.The lower court also dismissed the detainees’ claims under the Alien Tort Statute and the Geneva Conventions, finding defendants immune on the basis that "torture is a foreseeable consequence of the military’s detention of suspected enemy combatants."
The Constitution is clear: no person can be held without due process; no person can be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment. And the U.S. law on torture of any kind is crystal clear: it is forbidden, categorically, even in time of "national emergency." And the instigation of torture is, under U.S. law, a capital crime. No person can be tortured, at any time, for any reason, and there are no immunities whatsoever for torture offered anywhere in the law.And yet this is what Barack Obama -- who, we are told incessantly, is a super-brilliant Constitutional lawyer -- has been arguing in case after case since becoming president: Torturers are immune from prosecution; those who ordered torture are immune from prosecution. They can't even been sued for, in the specific case under review, subjecting uncharged, indefinitely detained captives to "beatings, sleep deprivation, forced nakedness, extreme hot and cold temperatures, death threats, interrogations at gunpoint, and threatened with unmuzzled dogs." Again, let's be absolutely clear: Barack Obama has taken the freely chosen, public, formal stand -- in court -- that there is nothing wrong with any of these activities. Nothing to answer for, nothing meriting punishment or even civil penalties. What's more, in championing the lower court ruling, Barack Obama is now on record as believing -- insisting -- that torture is an ordinary, "foreseeable consequence" of military detention of all those who are arbitrarily declared "suspected enemy combatants." And still further: Barack Obama has now declared, openly, of his own free will, that he does not consider these captives to be "persons." They are, literally, sub-humans. And what makes them sub-humans? The fact that someone in the U.S. government has declared them to be "suspected enemy combatants." (And note: even the mere suspicion of being an "enemy combatant" can strip you of your personhood.)This is what President Barack Obama believes -- believes so strongly that he has put the full weight of the government behind a relentless series of court actions to preserve, protect and defend these arbitrary powers. (For a glimpse at just a sliver of such cases, see here and here.) One co-counsel on the case, Shayana Kadidal of the Center for Constitutional Rights, zeroed in on the noxious quintessence of the position taken by the Court, and by our first African-American president: its chilling resemblance to the notorious Dred Scott ruling of 1857, which upheld the principle of slavery. As Fisher notes:
"Another set of claims are dismissed because Guantanamo detainees are not 'persons’ within the scope of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act – an argument that was too close to Dred Scott v. Sanford for one of the judges on the court of appeals to swallow," he added.The Dred Scott case was a decision by the United States Supreme Court in 1857. It ruled that people of African descent imported into the United States and held as slaves, or their descendants — whether or not they were slaves — were not protected by the Constitution and could never be citizens of the United States.
And now, once again, 144 years after the Civil War, we have established as the law of the land and the policy of the United States government that whole classes of people can be declared "non-persons" and have their liberty stripped away -- and their torturers and tormentors protected and coddled by authority -- at a moment's notice, with no charges, no defense, no redress, on nothing more than the suspicion that they might be an "enemy combatant," according to the arbitrary definition of the state. Barack Obama has had the audacity to declare himself the heir and embodiment of the lifework of Martin Luther King. Can this declaration of a whole new principle of universal slavery really be what King was dreaming of? Is this the vision he saw on the other side of the mountain? Or is not the nightmarish inversion of the ideal of a better, more just, more humane world that so many have died for, in so many places, down through the centuries?
Obama and the Supremes Stand Up for Slavery
Chris Floyd
December 18, 2009While we were all out doing our Christmas shopping, the highest court in the land quietly put the kibosh on a few more of the remaining shards of human liberty. It happened earlier this week, in a discreet ruling that attracted almost no notice and took little time. In fact, our most august defenders of the Constitution did not have to exert themselves in the slightest to eviscerate not merely 220 years of Constitutional jurisprudence but also centuries of agonizing effort to lift civilization a few inches out of the blood-soaked mire that is our common human legacy. They just had to write a single sentence.Here's how the bad deal went down. After hearing passionate arguments from the Obama Administration, the Supreme Court acquiesced to the president's fervent request and, in a one-line ruling, let stand a lower court decision that declared torture an ordinary, expected consequence of military detention, while introducing a shocking new precedent for all future courts to follow: anyone who is arbitrarily declared a "suspected enemy combatant" by the president or his designated minions is no longer a "person." They will simply cease to exist as a legal entity. They will have no inherent rights, no human rights, no legal standing whatsoever -- save whatever modicum of process the government arbitrarily deigns to grant them from time to time, with its ever-shifting tribunals and show trials.This extraordinary ruling occasioned none of those deep-delving "process stories" that glut the pages of the New York Times, where the minutiae of policy-making or political gaming is examined in highly-spun, microscopic detail doled out by self-interested insiders. Obviously, giving government the power to render whole classes of people "unpersons" was not an interesting subject for our media arbiters. It was news that wasn't fit to print. Likewise, the ruling provoked no thundering editorials in the Washington Post, no savvy analysis from the high commentariat -- and needless to say, no outrage whatsoever from all our fierce defenders of individual liberty on the Right. But William Fisher noticed, and gave this report at Antiwar.com:
In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s refusal Monday to review a lower court’s dismissal of a case brought by four British former Guantanamo prisoners against former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld, the detainees’ lawyers charged Tuesday that the country’s highest court evidently believes that "torture and religious humiliation are permissible tools for a government to use."...Channeling their predecessors in the George W. Bush administration, Obama Justice Department lawyers argued in this case that there is no constitutional right not to be tortured or otherwise abused in a U.S. prison abroad.The Obama administration had asked the court not to hear the case. By agreeing, the court let stand an earlier opinion by the D.C. Circuit Court, which found that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act – a statute that applies by its terms to all "persons" – did not apply to detainees at Guantanamo, effectively ruling that the detainees are not persons at all for purposes of U.S. law.The lower court also dismissed the detainees’ claims under the Alien Tort Statute and the Geneva Conventions, finding defendants immune on the basis that "torture is a foreseeable consequence of the military’s detention of suspected enemy combatants."
The Constitution is clear: no person can be held without due process; no person can be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment. And the U.S. law on torture of any kind is crystal clear: it is forbidden, categorically, even in time of "national emergency." And the instigation of torture is, under U.S. law, a capital crime. No person can be tortured, at any time, for any reason, and there are no immunities whatsoever for torture offered anywhere in the law.And yet this is what Barack Obama -- who, we are told incessantly, is a super-brilliant Constitutional lawyer -- has been arguing in case after case since becoming president: Torturers are immune from prosecution; those who ordered torture are immune from prosecution. They can't even been sued for, in the specific case under review, subjecting uncharged, indefinitely detained captives to "beatings, sleep deprivation, forced nakedness, extreme hot and cold temperatures, death threats, interrogations at gunpoint, and threatened with unmuzzled dogs." Again, let's be absolutely clear: Barack Obama has taken the freely chosen, public, formal stand -- in court -- that there is nothing wrong with any of these activities. Nothing to answer for, nothing meriting punishment or even civil penalties. What's more, in championing the lower court ruling, Barack Obama is now on record as believing -- insisting -- that torture is an ordinary, "foreseeable consequence" of military detention of all those who are arbitrarily declared "suspected enemy combatants." And still further: Barack Obama has now declared, openly, of his own free will, that he does not consider these captives to be "persons." They are, literally, sub-humans. And what makes them sub-humans? The fact that someone in the U.S. government has declared them to be "suspected enemy combatants." (And note: even the mere suspicion of being an "enemy combatant" can strip you of your personhood.)This is what President Barack Obama believes -- believes so strongly that he has put the full weight of the government behind a relentless series of court actions to preserve, protect and defend these arbitrary powers. (For a glimpse at just a sliver of such cases, see here and here.) One co-counsel on the case, Shayana Kadidal of the Center for Constitutional Rights, zeroed in on the noxious quintessence of the position taken by the Court, and by our first African-American president: its chilling resemblance to the notorious Dred Scott ruling of 1857, which upheld the principle of slavery. As Fisher notes:
"Another set of claims are dismissed because Guantanamo detainees are not 'persons’ within the scope of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act – an argument that was too close to Dred Scott v. Sanford for one of the judges on the court of appeals to swallow," he added.The Dred Scott case was a decision by the United States Supreme Court in 1857. It ruled that people of African descent imported into the United States and held as slaves, or their descendants — whether or not they were slaves — were not protected by the Constitution and could never be citizens of the United States.
And now, once again, 144 years after the Civil War, we have established as the law of the land and the policy of the United States government that whole classes of people can be declared "non-persons" and have their liberty stripped away -- and their torturers and tormentors protected and coddled by authority -- at a moment's notice, with no charges, no defense, no redress, on nothing more than the suspicion that they might be an "enemy combatant," according to the arbitrary definition of the state. Barack Obama has had the audacity to declare himself the heir and embodiment of the lifework of Martin Luther King. Can this declaration of a whole new principle of universal slavery really be what King was dreaming of? Is this the vision he saw on the other side of the mountain? Or is not the nightmarish inversion of the ideal of a better, more just, more humane world that so many have died for, in so many places, down through the centuries?
Sunday, December 6, 2009
The Truth About Becoming a Scientist
In the wake of the "Climategate" scandal, showing how and why scientists manipulate data for political reasons, here is an interesting article I found on Rense.com.
The Cold Truth About Being A 'Scientist'
Anonymous
12-5-9
There were 12 years of grade school, not including the first year of preparatory-brain-washing in kindergarten. In high school, soon it was time to think about an adult profession. Certainly no one wants to become an "associate" at a big box store, work in a hotel or restaurant or a clerk at a gas station. In the old days, factory work was another option but most of those jobs have gone overseas.
Maybe become a scientist, a doctor or a lawyer? Like everyone else, you want to make as much money as you can when you're an adult, so one of those professions would be best for you. That is, until the cost of college sinks in and how it will be paid for. Your parents spent much of their working life putting money aside for your education. But after doing the numbers, it becomes apparent that those funds will only pay for the first year or two in college.
So it's off to talk to the school counselor. It was hard work getting through 12 years of school to get good grades and the counselor should have all the answers. There are Pell Grants for living expenses and alternative ways to fund education. Loans might be an option if your parents are willing to bare their personal lives for college applications, too.
Nagging away in the back of your mind there is the shrinking, shriveling economy. Chances of finding a high-paying job that will pay off the loans are getting worse everyday. Parents will have to take out a second mortgage, but that's their problem right? But something must be done about a future profession.
So it's off to college with a new and growing debt. It's really a gamble that you'll do well in college and hopefully after graduating, there will be a high paying job waiting to pay off the debts. Some students that do well in high school do terrible in college, so who can know what will happen?
The first day at the dorm is a culture shock. It's a culture unlike what was expected from watching movies but soon you get used to it. After all, this will be life for the next 10 years or so. But that's too far off in the future to think about right now. After becoming orientated it's on with the coursework!
Fortunately things go well and funding is found to continue college, but others are not so fortunate. Some of your best friends had to leave school when their parents just couldn't handle more debt or one of them lost their job. These former students went back home to live in their old bedrooms and are now working in a big box stores, restaurants and a gas station but they still have college loans to pay, for a career they will never have.
In emails they state it's impossible to make those loan payments when they can't even live independently on the money they earn. Their parents often fight and argue over what they will do in this depression-economy, because now they have to make the loan payments in their senior years which your friends have defaulted on. And all of them dread Christmas time without any money to buy presents. Deep inside is a dread this could happen to you.
Now a girlfriend has entered the scene. The two of you have become quite close and she wants to make love. What will happen to your career if somehow she becomes pregnant? Wisely you decide not to even consider taking that chance. Upon refusal to have intercourse with her now she thinks you're a closet gay, but so be it. Education is the top priority, not fatherhood and a shaky minimum wage job.
Hard work propels you onward toward a career as a scientist. There are years of work in a faculty member's lab while continuing difficult courses and work on a thesis. The faculty advisor and mentor can only provide guidance. It's more than a full-time job, but you get used to it and know it will pay off in the end.
The faculty member and scientist who owns the lab never spends any time there. He's always in his office or away at a meeting or conference. When he is in the lab, he's usually there checking lab work progress, performing for a video crew or posing for still cameras. The scientist is taking credit for all your hard work! But that's how the game is played, and the reality sets in that he is not like the scientists on television documentaries.
Finally the day comes to defend the thesis which took about one year to write and edit. In a room with closed doors packed and numerous faculty members, you stand there and are grilled for about an hour. Everyone was given copies of the thesis long before this day. They read it and know everything it says. They have questions that must be answered right on the spot.
Then you are asked to wait outside in the hall for their decision. After what seems like forever, the conference room door opens. At this moment you will learn if the past ten years were worth it all or not. After being asked to step inside they shake your hand, congratulate you and address you for the first time in your life as doctor! You did it!
Now it's time to find a job. After emails and resumes are sent out, an offer comes from a west coast college. Arrangements are made to fly out there for an interview.
A staff member you've known for years warns that the cost of living in California is sky-high, but why should that matter? What does that matter to someone with a PhD, right?
At the interview a salary is offered as a newly minted PhD. Excited about the prospect of such a high-paying job, it's time to find a place to live. Then reality sets in even that high salary offer won't be enough to pay for a family, the cost of living out and education loans at the same time. Now your head is spinning how can this be possible? Depressed from another reality check, you refuse the offer and fly back home.
That same staff member, and engineer, bumps into you in the hall and asks the trip went. There is no choice but to admit that he was right the cost of living in California IS sky-high.
Fortunately, the very school you graduated from now has an associate faculty position open which they offer and you accept. You'll get to live near your friends and family.
Now a new chapter in life has opened. The college provides start-up money for a personal laboratory, too. Kind faculty members donate their unused equipment to help since the start-up money isn't enough for all the basic equipment needed.
Another cold reality is ever present. Produce several science papers each year and win enough grants or corporate funding to fund all the science work, or they will show you the door. The college gets more than half of all grant money for administrative and overhead costs, leaving what's left for research to pay for materials, lab assistants, etc...
But now you're a scientist. And the answer as to why that faculty member you used to work for that was never in their lab is finally apparent. Now you too, sit writing science papers and grants.
And yet another sobering reality check as a scientist sets in that of becoming a professional beggar for every-dwindling grant money just like all your colleagues! Some of them are competing for the same funds along with thousands of other scientists around the country.
Someone on staff naively suggests a new invention that will help people with a certain type of illness. There is no choice but to tell them that without grant money to fund and a corporation behind it, that it can't be done. It reinforces the golden rule concept that even in the academic world still applies the same one as the golden rule for venture capital "Those who have the gold, rule."
In the medical world, rare diseases almost never receive corporate research money or grants simply because not enough drugs will be sold or medical procedures will be performed to pay for the research AND earn billions of dollars for drug company shareholders. As a scientist you quickly learn that government grants, pharmaceutical and corporate profits are what really control all research funding behind the scenes. Essentially, they decide who will live and who will die. Forget about curious scientists wearing lab coats holding test tubes finding cures for rare diseases. That's Hollywood stuff.
If you had any idea ten years ago this was what being a scientist is all about, maybe you would have chosen another profession like engineering. Engineers don't usually write grant proposals, science papers or work over weekends and holidays to get their work done.
Down the hall from your office, a hopeful PhD student is now toiling away in your lab workingjust like you did for someone else. You are passing on the legacy, like it or not.
The Cold Truth About Being A 'Scientist'
Anonymous
12-5-9
There were 12 years of grade school, not including the first year of preparatory-brain-washing in kindergarten. In high school, soon it was time to think about an adult profession. Certainly no one wants to become an "associate" at a big box store, work in a hotel or restaurant or a clerk at a gas station. In the old days, factory work was another option but most of those jobs have gone overseas.
Maybe become a scientist, a doctor or a lawyer? Like everyone else, you want to make as much money as you can when you're an adult, so one of those professions would be best for you. That is, until the cost of college sinks in and how it will be paid for. Your parents spent much of their working life putting money aside for your education. But after doing the numbers, it becomes apparent that those funds will only pay for the first year or two in college.
So it's off to talk to the school counselor. It was hard work getting through 12 years of school to get good grades and the counselor should have all the answers. There are Pell Grants for living expenses and alternative ways to fund education. Loans might be an option if your parents are willing to bare their personal lives for college applications, too.
Nagging away in the back of your mind there is the shrinking, shriveling economy. Chances of finding a high-paying job that will pay off the loans are getting worse everyday. Parents will have to take out a second mortgage, but that's their problem right? But something must be done about a future profession.
So it's off to college with a new and growing debt. It's really a gamble that you'll do well in college and hopefully after graduating, there will be a high paying job waiting to pay off the debts. Some students that do well in high school do terrible in college, so who can know what will happen?
The first day at the dorm is a culture shock. It's a culture unlike what was expected from watching movies but soon you get used to it. After all, this will be life for the next 10 years or so. But that's too far off in the future to think about right now. After becoming orientated it's on with the coursework!
Fortunately things go well and funding is found to continue college, but others are not so fortunate. Some of your best friends had to leave school when their parents just couldn't handle more debt or one of them lost their job. These former students went back home to live in their old bedrooms and are now working in a big box stores, restaurants and a gas station but they still have college loans to pay, for a career they will never have.
In emails they state it's impossible to make those loan payments when they can't even live independently on the money they earn. Their parents often fight and argue over what they will do in this depression-economy, because now they have to make the loan payments in their senior years which your friends have defaulted on. And all of them dread Christmas time without any money to buy presents. Deep inside is a dread this could happen to you.
Now a girlfriend has entered the scene. The two of you have become quite close and she wants to make love. What will happen to your career if somehow she becomes pregnant? Wisely you decide not to even consider taking that chance. Upon refusal to have intercourse with her now she thinks you're a closet gay, but so be it. Education is the top priority, not fatherhood and a shaky minimum wage job.
Hard work propels you onward toward a career as a scientist. There are years of work in a faculty member's lab while continuing difficult courses and work on a thesis. The faculty advisor and mentor can only provide guidance. It's more than a full-time job, but you get used to it and know it will pay off in the end.
The faculty member and scientist who owns the lab never spends any time there. He's always in his office or away at a meeting or conference. When he is in the lab, he's usually there checking lab work progress, performing for a video crew or posing for still cameras. The scientist is taking credit for all your hard work! But that's how the game is played, and the reality sets in that he is not like the scientists on television documentaries.
Finally the day comes to defend the thesis which took about one year to write and edit. In a room with closed doors packed and numerous faculty members, you stand there and are grilled for about an hour. Everyone was given copies of the thesis long before this day. They read it and know everything it says. They have questions that must be answered right on the spot.
Then you are asked to wait outside in the hall for their decision. After what seems like forever, the conference room door opens. At this moment you will learn if the past ten years were worth it all or not. After being asked to step inside they shake your hand, congratulate you and address you for the first time in your life as doctor! You did it!
Now it's time to find a job. After emails and resumes are sent out, an offer comes from a west coast college. Arrangements are made to fly out there for an interview.
A staff member you've known for years warns that the cost of living in California is sky-high, but why should that matter? What does that matter to someone with a PhD, right?
At the interview a salary is offered as a newly minted PhD. Excited about the prospect of such a high-paying job, it's time to find a place to live. Then reality sets in even that high salary offer won't be enough to pay for a family, the cost of living out and education loans at the same time. Now your head is spinning how can this be possible? Depressed from another reality check, you refuse the offer and fly back home.
That same staff member, and engineer, bumps into you in the hall and asks the trip went. There is no choice but to admit that he was right the cost of living in California IS sky-high.
Fortunately, the very school you graduated from now has an associate faculty position open which they offer and you accept. You'll get to live near your friends and family.
Now a new chapter in life has opened. The college provides start-up money for a personal laboratory, too. Kind faculty members donate their unused equipment to help since the start-up money isn't enough for all the basic equipment needed.
Another cold reality is ever present. Produce several science papers each year and win enough grants or corporate funding to fund all the science work, or they will show you the door. The college gets more than half of all grant money for administrative and overhead costs, leaving what's left for research to pay for materials, lab assistants, etc...
But now you're a scientist. And the answer as to why that faculty member you used to work for that was never in their lab is finally apparent. Now you too, sit writing science papers and grants.
And yet another sobering reality check as a scientist sets in that of becoming a professional beggar for every-dwindling grant money just like all your colleagues! Some of them are competing for the same funds along with thousands of other scientists around the country.
Someone on staff naively suggests a new invention that will help people with a certain type of illness. There is no choice but to tell them that without grant money to fund and a corporation behind it, that it can't be done. It reinforces the golden rule concept that even in the academic world still applies the same one as the golden rule for venture capital "Those who have the gold, rule."
In the medical world, rare diseases almost never receive corporate research money or grants simply because not enough drugs will be sold or medical procedures will be performed to pay for the research AND earn billions of dollars for drug company shareholders. As a scientist you quickly learn that government grants, pharmaceutical and corporate profits are what really control all research funding behind the scenes. Essentially, they decide who will live and who will die. Forget about curious scientists wearing lab coats holding test tubes finding cures for rare diseases. That's Hollywood stuff.
If you had any idea ten years ago this was what being a scientist is all about, maybe you would have chosen another profession like engineering. Engineers don't usually write grant proposals, science papers or work over weekends and holidays to get their work done.
Down the hall from your office, a hopeful PhD student is now toiling away in your lab workingjust like you did for someone else. You are passing on the legacy, like it or not.
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
National Geographic Channel – Sell Out to 9/11 Conspiracy Coverup – EMRTC is a Major Government Contractor
I was extremely disappointed in the show that aired on National Geographic, “9/11: Science or Conspiracy”. I read a while back that National Geographic would be giving an un-biased view into the events of 9/11, putting the “Truthers” (as they continuously and mind-numbingly called them) against the official story, side by side. It actually started out as a decent showing, but about 20 minutes in, I realized that this was going to be another lame attempt to debunk the conspiracy theories.
The supposed “unbiased” and “thorough” documentary failed to cover most of the alarming evidence, including Building 7, insider trading, Tim Osman aka Bin Laden the CIA Informant, advance warnings, NORAD war games, Norman Mineta’s testimony, and witnesses on site who heard and felt the many explosions from below the buildings. The narrative in th
e documentary became so predictable, that I actually couldn’t wait to find out who EMRTC (Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center) was really working for. EMRTC was the company responsible for creating most of the irrelevant tests used to attempt to debunk the truthers.
After only two minutes of putting Google to work, it became quite clear. EMRTC is obviously a heavy government contractor, with severe conflicts of interest. Of course they would never do any test or experiment that could name the US Government liable. Here are some random pieces of information that were plucked from the internet:
(I think it’s also worthy to point out that the National Geographic Channel is primarily owned by CRF member Rupert Murdock, affiliated with Fox News.)
“EMRTC is a longstanding contractor for the U.S. government, researching explosives and weapons technology since WWII, working for DOD, Justice, DOE and numerous other federal agencies.” http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P3-1364052801.html
Found a photo on Wikimedia Commons, lists author as: “EMRTC, prepared under US Government Department of Defence contract”
Under the “Licensing” section of this photo it reads: “This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States Federal Government under the terms of Title 17, Chapter 1, Section 105 of the US Code. See Copyright.”
Other random internet text: “EMRTC supports the efforts of Homeland Security’s Office of Domestic Preparedness by providing emergency response training.”
“A request made by EMRTC to purchase 13 new vehicles for a total cost of $259069 under an existing state government contract.”
I also surfed the net a while longer, and found out I wasn’t the only one disappointed in National Geographic for their government shill work. Here are some quotes of what others had to say: (Quotes can be found at: http://ngccommunity.nationalgeographic.com/ngcblogs/inside-ngc/2009/08/911-science-and-conspiracy-directors-diary.html#ixzz0Ps0SrTSu)
“As I patiently viewed the program it had become abundantly apparent that this show would be a very slanted and one-sided. The “four experiments that can forensically simulate the 9/11 attacks” were if nothing else feeble. The National Geographic Channel should be ashamed for airing this program. It is a slap in the face not only to the people that lost their lives that day, their families and anyone who has a modicum of intelligence. How very disappointing, I expected more from National Geographic.”-Jo
“I'm pretty angry I wasted my time watching this program. I agree with earlier comments that the "science" models used in the program are totally weak.” -BabyDoc963
“Very upset about the program. NatGeo failed to answer anything except just show the same tests that have been shown for the past 8 years, and left out everything that still cant be answered by "officials"; building 7 collapse, planes vanishing for the first time in history after a crash, the loud explosions heard at both ground zero and the pentagon, the phone calls made in air with 100% perfect connectivity, Presidents Bushes slip ups, the stock options put on American Airlines and Boeing... Those are just a small fraction of what I want answers for .. NatGeo , you have just fueled the minds of the people who still want answers.” -tymel YOUNG
“A few things I find contradicting or missing from this program.
1. Jet fuel melts the steel and makes it weak enough to give out, but thermite does not. They have one piece of steel with many weights on it over a pool of jet fuel for one test. Then they use an entirely different style of steel and the way it sits in the thermite test.
2. They don't even mention the 3rd building that fell (building 7). It just fell on its own?
3. They mention how difficult it would be to conduct a controlled explosion, meaning it would be extremely difficult to bring a heavily built building down. 100 guys 3 months of working. Yet 2 Jets can hit and bring 2 separate (actually 3 - see #2) buildings down better than the group that did the controlled explosion on an 8-story dormitory.
4. The Pentagon - why was there no video shown (other than the one piece that shows nothing, then an explosion) in one of the cities that has the most video surveillance in the US?
Hopefully this makes people think and do some research. The 9-11 Commission spent less money on this investigation then the one that was done on Bill Clinton getting a bj.”
-woodsher
“More garbage as usual from National Geographic. You can keep spewing out your lies and propaganda but nobody's buying it anymore. I turned you off long ago.”-nothwind
“I'm disturbed that Nat Geo aired this program. While I agree that many intepretations are open to speculation, my issue comes from the Pentagon recreation. I didn't feel the model was built properly to scale and the explosives placed within the model, instead of outside, was a pointless example. If you place an explosive into a confined space, of course it will obliterate it. But if you place it on the outside, where a supposed hit could land, you will have a different outcome. Then there is the tail wing, which was far larger that the initial hole. Where was it? We had debris, but no real evidence of a plane crash in my opinion.
The entire program was an attack on the conspiracy theory and those that support it. I watched a program the other day while at work on PBS that had a lot of interesting info. Initial reports said a missile had hit the Pentagon. They announced the collapse of Building 7 before it ever happened; it had very minor structural damage. Multiple reports of hearing an explosion before the first plane ever hit the WTC. Why where these not addressed in this program? If you can't take all the supporting evidence and address it, of course the theory will not stand!”
-kalislahren
“I'm really dissapointed that NGC used the word "Science" in the title of this show. If you call Purdue University's computer graphics and the demonstrations that were done on this show in the desert "science" then we have made a mockery of what is known as the scientific processes that are well established. I'm sure real scientists that know these processes haven't stop laughing yet. When I watched the DVD documentary called "Blueprint For Truth" which you can see at ae911truth.org you can see that careful consideration was taken to use established scientific processes to explain the destruction of the twin towers and Building 7. This shows major purpose was to explain away the 9/11 Truth Movement's legitimate questions that contradict the governments official version. I bet if you follow the money that NGC gets to make these kind of shows it will take you to some rather interesting people and corporations. I have to give credit to Richard Gage, Dylan Avery and David Ray Griffin because they did their best considering they didn't have any control of the final editing version of this show. Now that's two shows that NGC did that were fixed for the official version. That means they got two strikes against them. I don't even want to see the third strike.” -Matthew_naus
“This is the absolute worst thing I've seen NGC do. I don’t even know where to begin...I won’t even try.”-FlintLock76
The supposed “unbiased” and “thorough” documentary failed to cover most of the alarming evidence, including Building 7, insider trading, Tim Osman aka Bin Laden the CIA Informant, advance warnings, NORAD war games, Norman Mineta’s testimony, and witnesses on site who heard and felt the many explosions from below the buildings. The narrative in th
e documentary became so predictable, that I actually couldn’t wait to find out who EMRTC (Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center) was really working for. EMRTC was the company responsible for creating most of the irrelevant tests used to attempt to debunk the truthers.After only two minutes of putting Google to work, it became quite clear. EMRTC is obviously a heavy government contractor, with severe conflicts of interest. Of course they would never do any test or experiment that could name the US Government liable. Here are some random pieces of information that were plucked from the internet:
(I think it’s also worthy to point out that the National Geographic Channel is primarily owned by CRF member Rupert Murdock, affiliated with Fox News.)
“EMRTC is a longstanding contractor for the U.S. government, researching explosives and weapons technology since WWII, working for DOD, Justice, DOE and numerous other federal agencies.” http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P3-1364052801.html
Found a photo on Wikimedia Commons, lists author as: “EMRTC, prepared under US Government Department of Defence contract”
Under the “Licensing” section of this photo it reads: “This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States Federal Government under the terms of Title 17, Chapter 1, Section 105 of the US Code. See Copyright.”
Other random internet text: “EMRTC supports the efforts of Homeland Security’s Office of Domestic Preparedness by providing emergency response training.”
“A request made by EMRTC to purchase 13 new vehicles for a total cost of $259069 under an existing state government contract.”
I also surfed the net a while longer, and found out I wasn’t the only one disappointed in National Geographic for their government shill work. Here are some quotes of what others had to say: (Quotes can be found at: http://ngccommunity.nationalgeographic.com/ngcblogs/inside-ngc/2009/08/911-science-and-conspiracy-directors-diary.html#ixzz0Ps0SrTSu)
“As I patiently viewed the program it had become abundantly apparent that this show would be a very slanted and one-sided. The “four experiments that can forensically simulate the 9/11 attacks” were if nothing else feeble. The National Geographic Channel should be ashamed for airing this program. It is a slap in the face not only to the people that lost their lives that day, their families and anyone who has a modicum of intelligence. How very disappointing, I expected more from National Geographic.”-Jo
“I'm pretty angry I wasted my time watching this program. I agree with earlier comments that the "science" models used in the program are totally weak.” -BabyDoc963
“Very upset about the program. NatGeo failed to answer anything except just show the same tests that have been shown for the past 8 years, and left out everything that still cant be answered by "officials"; building 7 collapse, planes vanishing for the first time in history after a crash, the loud explosions heard at both ground zero and the pentagon, the phone calls made in air with 100% perfect connectivity, Presidents Bushes slip ups, the stock options put on American Airlines and Boeing... Those are just a small fraction of what I want answers for .. NatGeo , you have just fueled the minds of the people who still want answers.” -tymel YOUNG
“A few things I find contradicting or missing from this program.
1. Jet fuel melts the steel and makes it weak enough to give out, but thermite does not. They have one piece of steel with many weights on it over a pool of jet fuel for one test. Then they use an entirely different style of steel and the way it sits in the thermite test.
2. They don't even mention the 3rd building that fell (building 7). It just fell on its own?
3. They mention how difficult it would be to conduct a controlled explosion, meaning it would be extremely difficult to bring a heavily built building down. 100 guys 3 months of working. Yet 2 Jets can hit and bring 2 separate (actually 3 - see #2) buildings down better than the group that did the controlled explosion on an 8-story dormitory.
4. The Pentagon - why was there no video shown (other than the one piece that shows nothing, then an explosion) in one of the cities that has the most video surveillance in the US?
Hopefully this makes people think and do some research. The 9-11 Commission spent less money on this investigation then the one that was done on Bill Clinton getting a bj.”
-woodsher
“More garbage as usual from National Geographic. You can keep spewing out your lies and propaganda but nobody's buying it anymore. I turned you off long ago.”-nothwind
“I'm disturbed that Nat Geo aired this program. While I agree that many intepretations are open to speculation, my issue comes from the Pentagon recreation. I didn't feel the model was built properly to scale and the explosives placed within the model, instead of outside, was a pointless example. If you place an explosive into a confined space, of course it will obliterate it. But if you place it on the outside, where a supposed hit could land, you will have a different outcome. Then there is the tail wing, which was far larger that the initial hole. Where was it? We had debris, but no real evidence of a plane crash in my opinion.
The entire program was an attack on the conspiracy theory and those that support it. I watched a program the other day while at work on PBS that had a lot of interesting info. Initial reports said a missile had hit the Pentagon. They announced the collapse of Building 7 before it ever happened; it had very minor structural damage. Multiple reports of hearing an explosion before the first plane ever hit the WTC. Why where these not addressed in this program? If you can't take all the supporting evidence and address it, of course the theory will not stand!”
-kalislahren
“I'm really dissapointed that NGC used the word "Science" in the title of this show. If you call Purdue University's computer graphics and the demonstrations that were done on this show in the desert "science" then we have made a mockery of what is known as the scientific processes that are well established. I'm sure real scientists that know these processes haven't stop laughing yet. When I watched the DVD documentary called "Blueprint For Truth" which you can see at ae911truth.org you can see that careful consideration was taken to use established scientific processes to explain the destruction of the twin towers and Building 7. This shows major purpose was to explain away the 9/11 Truth Movement's legitimate questions that contradict the governments official version. I bet if you follow the money that NGC gets to make these kind of shows it will take you to some rather interesting people and corporations. I have to give credit to Richard Gage, Dylan Avery and David Ray Griffin because they did their best considering they didn't have any control of the final editing version of this show. Now that's two shows that NGC did that were fixed for the official version. That means they got two strikes against them. I don't even want to see the third strike.” -Matthew_naus
“This is the absolute worst thing I've seen NGC do. I don’t even know where to begin...I won’t even try.”-FlintLock76
Thursday, July 30, 2009
"The Honey Pot"
Just want to throw a little theory... speculation... ideas out there... you know, think outside the box... What if the 9/11 Truth movement is meant to be one massive distraction, to keep the patriots busy, while something much larger is being planned? I'm in the middle of reading Mike Ruppert's "Crossing the Rubicon" where he makes mention of an intelligence term called "the honey pot". It's a piece of evidence or a source that is meant to attract all of the attention, (draw in the bees) eventually being discredited in the end.
Well what if the entire 9/11 fiasco, on a much higher and deeper level, is a part of the plan, to destabilize America, to put the people against each other, weaken the nation, to assist in the New World Order agenda? The Elite are well aware that one of their biggest obstacles to overcome is America and it's Constitution. We also know that the way you destroy an enemy is by planting seeds of information, seeds of dissent amongst it's members, dividing the enemy up in as many ways as possible, as explained in the Art of War, and practiced many times on other countries by our intelligence agencies in the past.
At the very highest levels of intelligence, they could be allowing this movement to grow, allowing people like Alex Jones, Richard Gage, Mark Dice, and Stephen Jones to continue pushing the movement... while the lower minions of the elite make feeble attempts to fight the truth. By allowing this to continue, they are able to keep attention away from something else being planned, and weaken their biggest enemy by creating a divided nation. "Patriot" vs. "Sheep" will become new labels in the long line of separatist terms used by media and society, along with "Rich" vs. "Poor", "Christian" vs. "Muslim" and "Left" vs. "Right". Even within the movement itself there are multiple divisions, with LIHOP vs. MIHOP (Let It Happen On Purpose vs. Made It Happen On Purpose) and people called "No-Planers".
This doesn't mean I don't support all of the work that the 9/11 Truth Movement is doing. These patriots actually inspire me with their bravery, and the progress they are making is astounding. My journey of discovery actually started with 9/11, and I will always have respect to all "truth pushers" everywhere. I only want to remind everyone that the enemy is much smarter than most of us think, that most likely we haven't seen the true men behind the curtain, and the big boys always play chess. Of course this idea of the 9/11 truth movement being a tool of the New World Order could be thinking too far outside the box, but it is just a possibility I wanted to throw out there... a theory... some speculation... an idea...
Keep thinking, never stop learning, don't get stagnant, continue pressing on for the highest and deepest truths...
Well what if the entire 9/11 fiasco, on a much higher and deeper level, is a part of the plan, to destabilize America, to put the people against each other, weaken the nation, to assist in the New World Order agenda? The Elite are well aware that one of their biggest obstacles to overcome is America and it's Constitution. We also know that the way you destroy an enemy is by planting seeds of information, seeds of dissent amongst it's members, dividing the enemy up in as many ways as possible, as explained in the Art of War, and practiced many times on other countries by our intelligence agencies in the past.
At the very highest levels of intelligence, they could be allowing this movement to grow, allowing people like Alex Jones, Richard Gage, Mark Dice, and Stephen Jones to continue pushing the movement... while the lower minions of the elite make feeble attempts to fight the truth. By allowing this to continue, they are able to keep attention away from something else being planned, and weaken their biggest enemy by creating a divided nation. "Patriot" vs. "Sheep" will become new labels in the long line of separatist terms used by media and society, along with "Rich" vs. "Poor", "Christian" vs. "Muslim" and "Left" vs. "Right". Even within the movement itself there are multiple divisions, with LIHOP vs. MIHOP (Let It Happen On Purpose vs. Made It Happen On Purpose) and people called "No-Planers".
This doesn't mean I don't support all of the work that the 9/11 Truth Movement is doing. These patriots actually inspire me with their bravery, and the progress they are making is astounding. My journey of discovery actually started with 9/11, and I will always have respect to all "truth pushers" everywhere. I only want to remind everyone that the enemy is much smarter than most of us think, that most likely we haven't seen the true men behind the curtain, and the big boys always play chess. Of course this idea of the 9/11 truth movement being a tool of the New World Order could be thinking too far outside the box, but it is just a possibility I wanted to throw out there... a theory... some speculation... an idea...
Keep thinking, never stop learning, don't get stagnant, continue pressing on for the highest and deepest truths...
Friday, July 3, 2009
Prophet, Psychic, or Just Informed? Swine Flu update.
Well it's obvious that I don't make blog posts very often... however I found it pretty uncanny that I made the post below about a possible "Biological Attack" two weeks before the stories of Swine Flu rocked the world. I have been surprising my wife and family quite frequently, by predicting major news events before they happen, such as the economic problems, a rash of shootings several months back, and the demonizing of the internet recently. Am I psychic? Am I a prophet? Not at all, not even close. I just read and pay attention to the clues that are hidden in plain sight.
The corporate controlled media is becoming too predictable, obviously following a specific agenda, and attempting to guide public opinion on a specific path. The sad part is that they also seem to be a step behind, as the alternative media, who have no major political or corporate interests and can freely report issues without worrying about the future impact, are reporting the major issues before mainstream media can get through their own red tape. Either they will die a slow death, or they will find a way to control the alternative media. The future of our information sources will be involved in a major battle indeed.
As an update to the Swine Flu, there seems to be a division among many sources. On one hand we have people saying that the fatality rate is way too low, that this is just a scare tactic to scare the public, socialize the medicine, reap profits from vaccinations, and set up more legislation for control. The other side of the coin is scared to death that this is the big one, that it will mutate and go out of control, possible combining with the avian flu, eventually triggering the global pandemic that could kill millions. One thing they both have in common, is that this epidemic was manufactured, and I totally agree as I was able to write my previous post before the event took place. They all also agree, that any manufactured vaccination could potentially be more dangerous than the virus itself. This is especially scary considering the crimes of Baxter in the past, sending out contaminated medicines on more than one occassion.
Personally, I believe in both theories. It is almost a certainty that we will face some type of larger pandemic in the coming years whether from avian flu or something else, and I believe this scare was manufactured to set up the policy and procedures to deal with the bigger problems coming down the line...
The corporate controlled media is becoming too predictable, obviously following a specific agenda, and attempting to guide public opinion on a specific path. The sad part is that they also seem to be a step behind, as the alternative media, who have no major political or corporate interests and can freely report issues without worrying about the future impact, are reporting the major issues before mainstream media can get through their own red tape. Either they will die a slow death, or they will find a way to control the alternative media. The future of our information sources will be involved in a major battle indeed.
As an update to the Swine Flu, there seems to be a division among many sources. On one hand we have people saying that the fatality rate is way too low, that this is just a scare tactic to scare the public, socialize the medicine, reap profits from vaccinations, and set up more legislation for control. The other side of the coin is scared to death that this is the big one, that it will mutate and go out of control, possible combining with the avian flu, eventually triggering the global pandemic that could kill millions. One thing they both have in common, is that this epidemic was manufactured, and I totally agree as I was able to write my previous post before the event took place. They all also agree, that any manufactured vaccination could potentially be more dangerous than the virus itself. This is especially scary considering the crimes of Baxter in the past, sending out contaminated medicines on more than one occassion.
Personally, I believe in both theories. It is almost a certainty that we will face some type of larger pandemic in the coming years whether from avian flu or something else, and I believe this scare was manufactured to set up the policy and procedures to deal with the bigger problems coming down the line...
Sunday, March 29, 2009
The Next False Flag Terrorist Attack, Possible Biological Weapon
I intend to write up a more thorough report soon, but for now I wanted to make some notes. From various personal sources, as well as information being obtained from various sites like Infowars.com, Rense.com, and WhatReallyHappened.com, I have come to the strong conclusion that there is not much time left before the "terrorists" strike again. And there seems to be a strong possibility that the threat will be some type of biological attack.
When I used to think about the "Fema Coffins" stored all over the country, (hundreds of thousands of black plastic sealable containers purchased by Fema, Burial Vaults made by PolygaurdVaults.com) I used to wonder, "if they were going to kill a bunch of people, why go through the trouble of putting them in a plastic container? Why not just dig a big ditch and dump all the bodies in a mass grave?" Then it eventually hit me... those burial vaults are air-tight, perfect to use to avoid some type of biological hazard.
There are several other little bits of evidence I have come across lately, such as Baxter having contaminated their flu vaccine with bird flu, the forced inoculations across the globe, and many theories about a H5N1 pandemic in the next year or two. There is also the possibility that they will blame this on Iran, as I've seen stories of how Iran hired Russian Bio-weapon engineers a long time ago (can't remember where I read that), and of course many of our leaders have been beating the Iran war drum for a while now.
Another thing that comes to mind is the report of several meetings between FEMA officials and a county representative just outside of Chicago, where they were asking him many strange questions, such as, "how would you handle mass graves, determine a plan to give vaccines to all of your residents in 24 hours, where are all of your public facilities, etc." Combine this information with the "FEMA Concentration Camp" stories all over the net, and it all just seems to make sense. I've seen video clips with the signs on the fences that say "Red" or "Blue", and that would make sense to label people with varying levels of biological contamination. (As a side note, I think mainstream media is going to attempt to debunk the fema camps soon, by the same government shills at popular mechanics who tried to debunk 9/11 truth, and failed miserably. Do your own research and don't believe these liars...)
As far as the threat occurring soon, usually what has happened in the past, is when the public starts gaining momentum in waking up to the rampant corruption, (as evidenced now by the multitude of websites, organizations, tea parties, and independent radio talk shows) the powers that be usually provide a great distraction, such as a war or terrorist attack, to throw everyone off. I also have some personal sources, as well as my own hunches, that danger is imminent, and a disaster will befall America soon.
When I used to think about the "Fema Coffins" stored all over the country, (hundreds of thousands of black plastic sealable containers purchased by Fema, Burial Vaults made by PolygaurdVaults.com) I used to wonder, "if they were going to kill a bunch of people, why go through the trouble of putting them in a plastic container? Why not just dig a big ditch and dump all the bodies in a mass grave?" Then it eventually hit me... those burial vaults are air-tight, perfect to use to avoid some type of biological hazard.
There are several other little bits of evidence I have come across lately, such as Baxter having contaminated their flu vaccine with bird flu, the forced inoculations across the globe, and many theories about a H5N1 pandemic in the next year or two. There is also the possibility that they will blame this on Iran, as I've seen stories of how Iran hired Russian Bio-weapon engineers a long time ago (can't remember where I read that), and of course many of our leaders have been beating the Iran war drum for a while now.
Another thing that comes to mind is the report of several meetings between FEMA officials and a county representative just outside of Chicago, where they were asking him many strange questions, such as, "how would you handle mass graves, determine a plan to give vaccines to all of your residents in 24 hours, where are all of your public facilities, etc." Combine this information with the "FEMA Concentration Camp" stories all over the net, and it all just seems to make sense. I've seen video clips with the signs on the fences that say "Red" or "Blue", and that would make sense to label people with varying levels of biological contamination. (As a side note, I think mainstream media is going to attempt to debunk the fema camps soon, by the same government shills at popular mechanics who tried to debunk 9/11 truth, and failed miserably. Do your own research and don't believe these liars...)
As far as the threat occurring soon, usually what has happened in the past, is when the public starts gaining momentum in waking up to the rampant corruption, (as evidenced now by the multitude of websites, organizations, tea parties, and independent radio talk shows) the powers that be usually provide a great distraction, such as a war or terrorist attack, to throw everyone off. I also have some personal sources, as well as my own hunches, that danger is imminent, and a disaster will befall America soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
