1970 Motown Time Capsule video featuring the song War by Edwin Starr
1970 Motown Time Capsule video featuring the song War by Edwin Starr
Discusses the physics, effects and defense against nuclear fallout. Describes the phenomena of natural radiation and the dangers of fallout. Explains the value of time, distance and mass in weakening the effect of residual radiation. Examines the effects of radiation on the body, food and water. Underscores adequate shelter and prescribed decontamination measures.
911truthseattle.org had the opportunity of meeting Norm Mineta. We were able to ask Mineta a few questions about his testimony before the 9/11 commission and the ommissions from the final report.
Warning: this is far-out research, outside of the box of daily reality. It is certainly not for everyone. 2996 people died that day at 9/11 in 2001… however, none of the figures you see in this video appear to move and behave as naturally to be expected from human beings. ►https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6hMn… Observe the shady, unnaturally unlikely movements and behavior of these characters. Ask yourself how they resist the strong, shifting winds at that height? Why don’t they exhibit any signs of physical distress from heat? The real people on the phone acted like real people, their windows were broken, but instead of waving outside, they went to the floor for oxygen because of the smoke and called 911, like normal people would do (like Kevin Cosgrove and Melissa Doi).
However, these figures here managed to smash the sealed and reinforced about 1 inch thick glass and went waving outside. Some even went as far as waving outside where there IS NO SMOKE whatsoever, which doesn’t make any sense at all. Why would you risk your life waving outside when there is no real immediate urge and danger on your floor and you can call 911 and wait? The answer is simple: one wouldn’t.
Welcome to the Twilight Zone on steroids. A more detailed observation of this most bizarre discovery: ►http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GX4hC1…
Project Bluebeam in full effect? Were the events of 9/11 part of it? Observe the deceptive power of traumatic conditioning, mainstream mass media projections, plasma and implosive electromagnetic pressure waves… the (negative) refraction/bending of light… and this pre-programmed black matter/bio-nanotechnology interacting with the fourth state of matter (ionized gas – plasma). Extreme destructive highly advanced technology acting like an organism. Watch this documentary (5 parts): the 9/11 WTC Attack Paradox ~ Secrets Man was Not Meant to Know: + One Step Beyond Judy Wood ►https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XnGk…
More to consider:
9/11 firefighters: signs of radiation at ground zero
Japanese activists claim that 9/11 related cancers similar illnesses in Hiroshima after dropping of nuclear bomb in World War II
911 Falling People~Into the Matrix and Beyond~What is Real??
Raw 9/11 Footage from a Hotel Window (watch from 14.30 – 14.45 minutes.. this is NOT a body, but part of an unconventional organic technology)
Discerning Eyes Only ~ 9/11 Anomaly ~ Object has Twin Brother ~ A Comparison
911 Shockwave and Explosion from NIST FOIA – WABC Dub1 42
9/11 Symbolism & Surrealism ~ Truth Stranger than Fiction ~ An Unexpected Disclosure
The Fukushima Holographic Ghost Man Projection (08-28-2011)
Proof 9/11 Attack By Holographic Intelligent Drones
Resolve your conditioning. Don’t be afraid to open your eyes. It’s time to make the right connections. This all is important evidence we have discovered, likely the tip of the iceberg. They continue to play on your basic emotions, as evil as it gets, but you keep falling for it, every time again. And with that they’re also continue playing with your future. This is all about the generation we leave behind, that is, IF there will be a next generation we will leave behind. Eventually this may and will become a global matter of life or death, when it has become a very serious film in an unlikely movie theater.
How can we explain that in the 2lst century we are still training millions of men and women in our armed forces and sending them to war?
There are more choices than war or peace, there are multi-optional choices and a civilian-based non-military diplomatic-political policy has more chance of succeeding in solving a violent conflict.
In war, the cost in civilian lives is incalculable, not to mention the many military personnel whose lives are destroyed. Then there is the cost to the environment and the cost to human potential as our scientists waste their lives planning and researching even more horrific weapons which increasingly, in modern war, kill more civilians than combatants.
For example, the United States and the United Kingdom committed genocide against the Iraqi people when, between 1990 and 2012, they killed 3.3 million people – including 750,000 children – through sanctions and wars.
We all also watched our television screens in horror in July and August this year as the Israeli military bombarded civilians in Gaza for 50 days.
But, why are we surprised at this cruelty of military when they are doing what they are trained to do – kill, at the behest of their politicians and some people?
It is shocking to listen to politicians and military boast of their military prowess when in lay persons’ terms what it means is killing of human beings.
Every day through our television and local culture, we are subjected to the glorification of militarism and bombarded with war propaganda by governments telling us we need nuclear weapons, arms manufacturers, and war to kill the killers who might kill us.
However, too many people do not have peace or the basics to help them achieve peace.
They live their lives struggling with the roots of violence, some of which are poverty, war, militarism, occupation, racism and fascism. They have seen that they release uncontrollable forces of tribalism and nationalism. These are dangerous and murderous forms of identity which we need to transcend.
To do this, we need to acknowledge that our common humanity and human dignity are more important than our different traditions; to recognize that our lives and the lives of others are sacred and we can solve our problems without killing each other; to accept and celebrate diversity and otherness; to work to heal the ‘old’ divisions and misunderstandings; to give and accept forgiveness, and to choose listening, dialogue and diplomacy; to disarm and demilitarize as the pathway to peace.
In my own country, in Northern Ireland, when faced with a violent and prolonged ethnic/political conflict, the civil community organized to take a stand, rejected all violence and committed itself to working for peace, justice and reconciliation.
Through unconditional, all-inclusive dialogue, we reached peace and continue to work to build up trust and friendship and change in the post-conflict era. The civil community took a leading role in this journey from violence to peace.
I hope this will give an example to other countries such as Ukraine, where it is necessary for an end to the war, and a solution of the problem on the basis of the Charter of the United Nations and the Helsinki Accords.
We are also challenged to continue to build structures through which we can cooperate and which reflect our relations of interconnection and interdependence. The vision of the founders of the European Union to link countries together economically in order to lessen the likelihood of war among nations is a worthy endeavor.
Unfortunately instead of putting more energy into providing help for E.U. citizens and others, we are witnessing the growing militarization of Europe, its role as a driving force for armament and its dangerous path, under the leadership of the United States/NATO, towards a new ‘cold’ war and military aggression.
The European Union and many of its countries, which used to take initiatives in the United Nations for peaceful settlements of conflict, are now one of the most important war assets of the U.S./NATO front. Many countries have also been drawn into complicity in breaking international law through U.S./U.K./NATO wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and so on.
It is for this reason that I believe NATO should be abolished and that steps be taken towards disarmament through non-violent action and civil resistance.
The means of resistance are very important. Our message that armed groups, militarism and war do not solve our problems but aggravate them challenges us to use new ways and that is why we need to teach the science of peace at every level of society.
The whole of civilization is now facing a challenge with the growth of what President Dwight Eisenhower (1953-1961) warned the U.S. people against – the military/industrial complex – saying that it would destroy U.S. democracy.
We know now that a small group made up of the military/industrial/media/corporate/academic elite, whose agenda is profit, arms, war and valuable resources, now holds power worldwide and has a stronghold on elected governments. We see this in the gun and Israeli lobbies, among others, which wield great power over U.S. politics.
We have witnessed this in ongoing wars, invasions, occupations and proxy wars, all allegedly in the name of “humanitarian intervention and democracy”. However, in reality, they are causing great suffering, especially to the poor, through their policies of arms, war, domination and control of other countries and their resources.
Unmaking this agenda of war and demanding the implementation of justice, human rights and international law is the work of the peace movement.
We can turn our current path of destruction around by spelling out a clear vision of what kind of a world we want to live in, demanding an end to the military-industrial complex, and insisting that our governments adopt policies of peace, just economics and cooperation with each other in this multi-polar world.
Posted in economics, foreign policy, government, military | Tagged European Union, militarism, military expansion, military personnel, The European Union, United Nations, United States | Leave a Comment »
To blot people out of existence first you must blot them from your mind. Then you can persuade yourself that what you are doing is moral and necessary. Today this isn’t difficult. Those who act without compassion can draw upon a system of thought and language whose purpose is to shield them – and blind us – to the consequences.
The contention by Lord Freud, a minister in the UK’s Department of Work and Pensions, that disabled people are “not worth the full wage” isn’t the worst thing he’s alleged to have said. I say “alleged” because what my ears tell me is contested by Hansard, the official parliamentary record. During a debate in the House of Lords, he appeared to describe the changing number of disabled people likely to receive the employment and support allowance as a “bulge of, effectively, stock”. After a furious response by the people he was talking about, this was transcribed by Hansard as “stopped”, rendering the sentence meaningless. I’ve listened to the word several times on the parliamentary video. Like others, I struggle to hear it as anything but “stock”.
Canada has raised its domestic terrorism threat level.
In a statement released Tuesday Jason Tamming, a spokesman for the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency, said the decision to raise the level was “linked to an increase in general chatter from radical Islamist organizations like ISIL, Al Qaeda, Al Shabaab and others who pose a clear threat to Canadians.”
Tamming added that the elevated level means “intelligence has indicated that an individual or group within Canada or abroad has the intent and capability to commit an act of terrorism, and that the Integrated Terrorism Assessment Centre assesses that a violent act of terrorism could occur.”
The level was raised from low to medium just days before a man drove a car into two soldiers near Montreal, killing 53-year-old warrant officer Patrice Vincent. Police said the car was driven deliberately into the soldiers. The incident has been called an act of violence against Canada that was “clearly linked” to terrorist ideology.
Tamming said the increased level is not the result of a specific threat.
It’s getting difficult to remember a time when the Canadian Parliament actually tried to make principled decisions regarding foreign policy and our place in the community of nations. But we should try. Perhaps a first step in returning to such a time was the decision of the NDP and Liberal Party to oppose Stephen Harper’s most recent ill-considered and cynical march to war with his decision to join the bombing of Iraq.
Harper’s amoral political calculations about who and when to bomb people has little to do with any genuine consideration of the geopolitical situation or what role Canada might usefully play — or even in what Canada’s “interests” are. So long as he is prime minister it will be the same: every calculation will be made with the single-minded goal of staying in power long enough to dismantle the post-war activist state. The nurturing of his core constituency includes appeals to a thinly disguised pseudo-crusade against Islamic infidels, a phony appeal to national security (preceded by fear-mongering) and in the case of Ukraine, a crude appeal to ethnic votes.
Reinforcing this legacy is a mainstream media that lets him get away with it, and in particular, refuses to do its homework while the bombing — or posturing — is taking place and then refuses to expose the negative consequences of the reckless adventures. The result is what cultural critic Henry Giroux calls “the fog of historical and social amnesia.”
The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can ‘throw the rascals out’ at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy.
—Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time
Via: Boston Globe:
The voters who put Barack Obama in office expected some big changes. From the NSA’s warrantless wiretapping to Guantanamo Bay to the Patriot Act, candidate Obama was a defender of civil liberties and privacy, promising a dramatically different approach from his predecessor.
But six years into his administration, the Obama version of national security looks almost indistinguishable from the one he inherited. Guantanamo Bay remains open. The NSA has, if anything, become more aggressive in monitoring Americans. Drone strikes have escalated. Most recently it was reported that the same president who won a Nobel Prize in part for promoting nuclear disarmament is spending up to $1 trillion modernizing and revitalizing America’s nuclear weapons.
Why did the face in the Oval Office change but the policies remain the same? Critics tend to focus on Obama himself, a leader who perhaps has shifted with politics to take a harder line. But Tufts University political scientist Michael J. Glennon has a more pessimistic answer: Obama couldn’t have changed policies much even if he tried.
Though it’s a bedrock American principle that citizens can steer their own government by electing new officials, Glennon suggests that in practice, much of our government no longer works that way. In a new book, “National Security and Double Government,” he catalogs the ways that the defense and national security apparatus is effectively self-governing, with virtually no accountability, transparency, or checks and balances of any kind. He uses the term “double government”: There’s the one we elect, and then there’s the one behind it, steering huge swaths of policy almost unchecked. Elected officials end up serving as mere cover for the real decisions made by the bureaucracy.
(The following notes for a study I did on the origins and history of US intelligence organizations.)
Within this cult of secrecy weapons research and testing on unconventional weapons was accelerated, and Fort Deitrick, Maryland specialized in bacteriological warfare. (B.W.) In l900, during the U.S. military occupation of Havana, a vicious scourge of yellow fever raged through the cities barrios like a river of death killing and terrifying 14. thousands. Yellow fever is a frightful virus that begins with the sudden onset of fever usually accompanied by a chill and severe pain in the head, back, and limbs. The body temperature spikes swiftly until it reaches a maximum of 103- 105 degrees. Other symptoms include excruciating abdominal cramps, diarrhea, and jaundice. This stage may last from a few hours to several days. In it’s secondary stage the fever flares back to its original elevation, the skin turns yellow, and repeated vomiting occurs, spewing dark blood, usually followed by death. U.S. army doctors led by Walter Reed helped discover that yellow fever is a virus transmitted by mosquito bites and Havana was cleansed of breeding areas.
Sixty years after Dr. Reed’s death many residents of a small north Florida town began to experience symptoms of yellow fever and dengue. Carver Village, whose residents in l960 were exclusively black, reported the mysterious appearance of fevers, bronchitis, typhoid, encephalitis, stillbirths, and deaths. (cockburn) Collaborating under cover of top secret classification, United States Army B.W. researchers at Fort Detrick, had among other things, developed the ability of breeding one hundred and thirty million mosquitoes a month. The Army, in a biological warfare test, released these insects over Savannah, Georgia and Avon Park, Florida but Carver Village was selected to determine the productivity of targeted transmission of yellow fever and dengue by mosquito’s. (Cockburn New Statesmen 28-1-94 p22)
Fort Deitrick, fifty miles from Washington D.C., was 15. designated, by presidential directive in l942, as the United State’s principle biological and chemical warfare research center. (Leonard A. Cole,Totowa, N.J., Rowman and Littlefield, l988) Fort Deitrick, a l983 army brochure reported, studies “some of the most virulent and pathogenic microorganisms which are threats to U.S. military forces.” ibid. The sixteen page document goes on to list some of the organism’s and agents studied including ” the Lassa fever virus, Ebola virus, various hemorrhagic fever viruses, botulism and anthrax toxins, T-2 and other mycotoxins, equine encephalomyelitis, Q fever, tularemia, yellow fever, and Rift valley fever”. ibid 36
In l947 the World War Two Allies began the prosecution of twenty three German physicians, at Nuremberg, accused of committing crimes against humanity including human medical experimentation. U.S. Brigadier General Telford Taylor charged, in his opening remarks, that the defendants included “leaders of German scientific medicine with excellent international reputations” and that “all of them have in common a callous lack of consideration and human regard for, and an unprincipled willingness to abuse their power, over the poor, unfortunate, defenseless creatures who had been deprived of their rights by a ruthless and criminal government.” (Psychiatry and the CIA: Victims of Mind Control p214 American Psychiatric Press London , l990) He added, the self-evident, that all of them had violated their Hippocratic oaths. 16.
Among the defense arguments was that human experimentation for which no consent was given had been conducted routinely throughout the world. The defense cited ll,000 example’s appearing in medical literature. Dr. Andrew Ivy, an American, testified for the prosecution that he was unaware of any deaths occurring in the cases cited and that informed consent was the ethical cornerstone of human experimentation. ibid. Emerging from these proceedings were a set of ten principles known as the Nuremberg Code of Medical Ethics. The first principle begins with “The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential”.
‘In case you weren’t aware, the Pentagon is set to roll out a 50th anniversary commemoration of the Vietnam War. Personally, it’s hard to get excited about commemorating an event that led to the death of over 58,000 American soldiers and more than a million Vietnamese, particularly since much of it was the direct result of well documented lies and deception, such as the Gulf of Tonkin incident.
What’s worse, the Pentagon intends to rewrite history by whitewashing this period of civil unrest and government shame from American history. The propaganda is so blatant that it has resulted in many of the era’s most well known protestors and activists to come together in order to stop it.’
Posted in foreign policy, government, history, media, military | Tagged American history, American soldiers, anniversary commemoration, pentagon, The Pentagon, Vietnam war, Vietnam War History | Leave a Comment »
Given the frenzy of interest following the announcement of the Apple Watch, you might think wearables will be the next really important shift in technology.
Wearables will have their moment in the sun, but they’re simply a transition technology.
Technology will move from existing outside our bodies to residing inside us.
That’s the next big frontier.
Here are nine signs that implantable tech is here now, growing rapidly, and that it will be part of your life (and your body) in the near future.
1. Implantable smartphones
Sure, we’re virtual connected to our phones 24/7 now, but what if we were actually connected to our phones?
That’s already starting to happen.
Last year, for instance, artist Anthony Antonellis had an RFID chip embedded in his arm that could store and transfer art to his handheld smartphone.
Researchers are experimenting with embedded sensors that turn human bone into living speakers.
Other scientists are working on eye implants that let an image be captured with a blink and transmitted to any local storage (such as that arm-borne RFID chip).
–For third year in a row, Foley’s effective tax rate was zero 18 Oct 2014 (CT) Republican gubernatorial nominee [and plagiarist] Tom Foley, the wealthy Greenwich investor who spent $11 million of his own fortune running against Democratic Gov. Dannel P. Malloy in 2010, had an effective federal tax rate of zero in 2013. The Foley campaign allowed reporters to view summaries of the candidate’s 2013 federal income tax returns Friday — after last month granting members of the press access to summaries of his 2010, 2011 and 2012 returns. The most recent returns reveal that Foley paid zero percent in federal taxes for the third year in a row, a fact that will probably fuel Democratic criticism about the Republican candidate’s wealth.