1. Research using polls and questionnaires continue to show that 3 of every 4 doctors and scientists would refuse chemotherapy for themselves due to its devastating effects on the entire body and the immune system, and because of its extremely low success rate. On top of that, only 2 to 4% of all cancers even respond to chemotherapy or prove to be “life extending,” yet it is prescribed across the board for just about every kind of cancer.

    Polls were taken by accomplished scientists at the McGill Cancer Center from 118 doctors who are all experts on cancer. They asked the doctors to imagine they had cancer and to choose from six different “experimental” therapies. These doctors not only denied chemo choices, but they said they wouldn’t allow their family members to go through the process either! What does that say about their true opinion of this archaic method?

     
  2. Comments
  3. 15:08

    Notes: 14

    Reblogged from adailyriot

    intercontinentalcry:

    U.S. Human rights activists document U.S. participation in massacre of Moskito people

    Rights Action reports on a recent independent inquiry into the May 11, 2012 massacre of indigenous Miskito people in the Moskitia region of Honduras.

    A much more detailed report is available at the following link: D.E.A. Action Leads To Massacre In…

     
  4. Comments

  5. As the old saying goes, the beginning of wisdom is to call things by their proper names. We cannot substantially improve the world until we understand what the world actually is.

    The world looks like a map of countries, governments and cultures, a jigsaw puzzle of various tribes in various states of development. There are better and worse governments, more liberal and more repressive cultures, divergent modes of social organization, and so on.

    This is how the world looks, to be sure, but this is not what the world actually is.

    When we were young, the reality of the world was very clear to us. We needed very little outside help to understand and experience the world as it actually was. We did not need maps, fairy tales (religion) or scary stories (propaganda) to tell us that it’s brighter by day than by night, or that chocolate tastes good, and a skinned knee feels bad.

    Remember for a moment the enormous effort that was poured into you as a child, to plant allegiance in your innocent chest to your local tribe, through sports, politics, religion / culture as a whole.

    Why was that done? What was the purpose?

    Every intelligent person understands that the God he was trained to believe in is just one of thousands of gods accepted as real the world over and that every child must believe that his own God is the one true God, and disbelieve in every other deity.

    In the same way, although we were always told that our own countries and cultures are the best, we also know, as intelligent adults, that every other child is told the same thing, and that it is utterly impossible for this to be universally true.

    Why is so much effort poured into indoctrinating us? Why is it so important for us to develop this fetishistic allegiance to our local tribe, our local fantasies, our local priests, our local leaders?

    The ‘why’ is a fascinating story, and it can very well be called, ‘The Story of Our Enslavement.’

    Why We Are Trained

    Human beings want to dominate and exploit the resources around them. At first, we mostly hunted, fished and ate off the land, but then something magical—and terrible—happened to our minds.

    Unique among the animals, we became afraid of the idea of death, and of future loss.

    This was the start of a great tragedy, and an even greater possibility…

    When we became afraid of death, of injury, and imprisonment, we became controllable—and so valuable—in a way that no other resource could ever be.

    The greatest resource for any human being to control is not a natural resource, or a tool, or an animal or land—but other human beings.

    You can frighten an animal, because animals are afraid of pain in the moment, but you cannot frighten an animal with a loss of liberty, or with the possibility of future torture or imprisonment, because animals have very little sense of tomorrow. You cannot make a cow fatter by punishing it with torture, or force a sheep to produce more wool by intimidating it with possible death. You cannot swing a sword at a tree and scream at it to produce more fruit, or hold a burning torch to a field and demand more wheat. You cannot get more eggs by menacing a hen, but you can get a man to give you his eggs by threatening him.

    This is the essence of the world that we live in—and this is what we are looking at, when we regard a map of the world. We are not looking at countries, or cultures, or religions…we are in fact looking at farms.

    Farms holding people, owned by other people.

    The reason that so much effort was poured into propagandizing you as a child is that propaganda is the fertilizer of human farming – in every sense of the word. Human farming has been the most profitable—and destructive—occupation throughout history, and it’s now reaching its climax. Human society cannot be rationally understood until it is seen for what it is: a series of farms where human farmers own human livestock.

    Some people get confused because governments provide healthcare and water and education and roads, and thus imagine that there is some benevolence at work. Nothing could be further from the truth. All farmers provide healthcare and irrigation and training to their livestock.

    Some people get confused because we are allowed certain liberties, and thus imagine that our governments protect our freedoms. But all farmers plant their crops a certain distance apart to increase their yields—and will allow certain animals larger stalls or fields if it means they will produce more meat and milk.

    In your country, your tax farm, your farmer grants you certain freedoms not because he cares about your liberties, but because he wants to increase his profits.

    Are you beginning to see the nature of the cage you were born into?

    The History of Human Farming

    There have been four major phases of human farming.

    Egyptian

    The first phase, used in ancient Egypt, was direct and brutal human compulsion. Human bodies were controlled, but the creative productivity of the human mind remained beyond the reach of the whip, the brand and the shackles. Slaves remained woefully underproductive, and required enormous resources to control. They could produce pyramids, but not movies or microchips.

    Roman

    The second phase was the Roman model, wherein slaves were granted some capacity for freedom, ingenuity and creativity, which raised their productivity. This increased the wealth of Rome by adding to the tax income of the Roman government. With this additional wealth, Rome aggressively expanded into an empire, eventually destroying the economic freedoms that fed its power, and collapsed. No doubt this does not seem entirely unfamiliar?

    Feudal

    After the collapse of Rome, the feudal model introduced the concept of ‘free range’ livestock, combined with taxation. Instead of being directly owned, peasants farmed land that they were allowed to retain as long as they paid off the local warlord. This model broke down due to the continual subdivision of productive land, and was destroyed during the Enclosure Movement, when land was consolidated, and hundreds of thousands of peasants were kicked off their ancestral lands, because new farming techniques made larger farms more productive using fewer people.

    The increased productivity of the late Middle Ages created the excess food required for the expansion of towns and cities, which in turn gave rise to the modern Democratic model of human ownership.

    Democratic

    As displaced peasants flooded into the cities, huge stocks of cheap human capital became available to the rising industrialists—and the ruling class of human farmers quickly realized that they could make more money by letting their livestock choose their own occupations.

    Under the Democratic model, direct slave ownership has been replaced by the Mafia model. The Mafia rarely owns businesses directly, but rather sends thugs around once a month to steal from the business ‘owners.’ You are now allowed to choose your own occupation, which raises your productivity—and thus the taxes you can pay to your masters.

    Your few freedoms are preserved because they are profitable to your owners. You are more productive when you feel free, and since voting allows you to feel free, you are welcome to it—as long as you only vote on who your master is, not on whether you should have a master at all.

    The great challenge of the Democratic model is that increases in wealth and freedom threaten the control and power of the farmers. The ruling classes initially profit from a relatively free market in capital and labor, but as their livestock become more used to their freedoms and growing wealth, they begin to question why they need rulers at all. Ah well. Nobody ever said that human farming was easy. Keeping the tax livestock securely in the compounds of the ruling classes has been a three-phase process.

    Phase One: Indoctrination

    The first phase is to indoctrinate the young through government ‘education.’ As the wealth of democratic countries grows, government schools are universally inflicted on children in order to control the thoughts and souls of their future livestock. All children bond with their educators. As women became liberated from the constraints of housework due to developments in, and the availability of, labor saving devices, government-paid intellectuals encouraged them to enter the taxable marketplace. With both parents working outside the home, governments can then take over the early education and indoctrination of children. Within less than a generation, taxes have increased to the point where two parents working take home less money than one parent working in the past.

    Phase Two: Division

    The second phase of livestock control is to pit citizens against each other through the creation of dependence while appearing to foster independence. It is very difficult to rule human beings directly through force—and where it can be achieved, it remains cripplingly underproductive, as can be seen in North Korea. Human beings do not breed well or produce efficiently in direct captivity.

    If human beings believe that they are free, however, they will produce much more for their farmers. The best way to maintain this illusion of freedom is to put some of the livestock on the payroll of the governing farmer. Those who become dependent on the existing hierarchy will then attack anyone who points out the violence, hypocrisy and immorality of human ownership.

    Freedom is slavery, and slavery is freedom?

    If farmers can get the livestock to attack each other whenever one of them brings up the reality of their situation, they don’t have to spend nearly as much effort controlling them directly.

    Those who become dependent upon the stolen largess of the farmer will violently oppose any questioning of the virtue of human ownership—and the intellectual and artistic classes, always and forever dependent upon the state—will say, to anyone who demands freedom from ownership: ‘You will harm the herd.’

    The livestock are kept enclosed by shifting the moral responsibility for the destructiveness of the system to those who demand real freedoms.

    Phase Three: Fear

    The third phase of livestock management is to invent continual external threats, so that the frightened livestock cling to the ‘protection’ of the farmers.

    The Future?

    This system of human farming is now nearing its end.

    The terrible tragedy of the present system has occurred not in spite of, but because of past economic freedoms. The massive increases in wealth throughout the 19th century resulted from economic freedoms—and it is this very increase in wealth that has fed the size and power of the state.

    When the livestock become exponentially more productive, there is a corresponding increase in the number of farmers and their dependents. The growth of the state is always proportional to the preceding economic freedoms. Freedom creates wealth, and the wealth attracts thieves and political parasites, whose greed then destroys the economic freedoms.

    In other words, freedom metastasizes the cancer of the state.

    The government that starts off the smallest will always end up the largest. This is why there can be no viable and sustainable alternative to a truly free and peaceful society. A society without political rulers, without human ownership, without the violence of taxation and statism.

    To be truly free is both very easy, and very hard. We avoid the horror of our enslavement because it is painful to see it directly. We dance around the violence of our dying system because we fear the attacks of our fellow livestock. But we can only be kept in the cages we refuse to see.

    Wake up.

    To see the farm is to leave it.

    — An author by the name of Stefan Molyneux, brought up an interesting idea on Human farming. (via thinksquad)
     
  6. Comments
  7. thepeoplesrecord:

    pragmatichominid:

    fariyahsn:

    Dramatic increases in infant mortality, cancer and leukaemia in the Iraqi city of Fallujah, which was bombarded by US Marines in 2004, exceed those reported by survivors of the atomic bombs that were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, according to a new study.

    Iraqi doctors in Fallujah have complained since 2005 of being overwhelmed by the number of babies with serious birth defects, ranging from a girl born with two heads to paralysis of the lower limbs. They said they were also seeing far more cancers than they did before the battle for Fallujah between US troops and insurgents.

    Their claims have been supported by a survey showing a four-fold increase in all cancers and a 12-fold increase in childhood cancer in under-14s. Infant mortality in the city is more than four times higher than in neighbouring Jordan and eight times higher than in Kuwait.

    Dr Chris Busby, a visiting professor at the University of Ulster and one of the authors of the survey of 4,800 individuals in Fallujah, said it is difficult to pin down the exact cause of the cancers and birth defects. He added that “to produce an effect like this, some very major mutagenic exposure must have occurred in 2004 when the attacks happened”.

    […]

    The study, entitled “Cancer, Infant Mortality and Birth Sex-Ratio in Fallujah, Iraq 2005-2009”, is by Dr Busby, Malak Hamdan and Entesar Ariabi, and concludes that anecdotal evidence of a sharp rise in cancer and congenital birth defects is correct. Infant mortality was found to be 80 per 1,000 births compared to 19 in Egypt, 17 in Jordan and 9.7 in Kuwait. The report says that the types of cancer are “similar to that in the Hiroshima survivors who were exposed to ionising radiation from the bomb and uranium in the fallout”.

    Researchers found a 38-fold increase in leukaemia, a ten-fold increase in female breast cancer and significant increases in lymphoma and brain tumours in adults. At Hiroshima survivors showed a 17-fold increase in leukaemia, but in Fallujah Dr Busby says what is striking is not only the greater prevalence of cancer but the speed with which it was affecting people.

    Of particular significance was the finding that the sex ratio between newborn boys and girls had changed. In a normal population this is 1,050 boys born to 1,000 girls, but for those born from 2005 there was an 18 per cent drop in male births, so the ratio was 850 males to 1,000 females. The sex-ratio is an indicator of genetic damage that affects boys more than girls. A similar change in the sex-ratio was discovered after Hiroshima.

    This is what our government does. 

    Built on the land of the natives, blood & sweat of blacks & thriving on the suffering of millions worldwide: USA.

     
  8. Comments
  9. 18:55

    Notes: 72

    Reblogged from mysticmementos

    Tags: sciencephilosophy

    
Stan Grof, Toward 2012

    Stan Grof, Toward 2012

    (Source: resonantfrequencies)

     
  10. Comments
  11. 20:53 29th May 2012

    Notes: 119

    Reblogged from thepeoplesrecord

    image: Download

    rainbowsmokes:

Andrew Pshenichnikov (23 years old) has already spent a week in Israeli prison. Andrew possesses Israeli citizenship, which he seeks to give up in order to become full citizen of Palestine. His only fault - violation of the blockade put on the Palestinian Authority. Two months ago Andrew moved to the territory of the Palestinian Authority and made his home in the refugee camp called Dheysha (near Bethlehem). For that he was thrown into Israeli prison. Today in the court he stated that he doesn’t recognize legitimacy of Israeli government and its judiciary and will not accept any judgment. Besides that Andrew said that he supports Palestinian resistance against occupation and declared ideological closeness to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. After the court hearing Andrew returned to prison. And he will stay there until the next hearing.
That man is a true Jew, I have more than just mere respect for him, I hope he is set free soon. 

    rainbowsmokes:

    Andrew Pshenichnikov (23 years old) has already spent a week in Israeli prison. Andrew possesses Israeli citizenship, which he seeks to give up in order to become full citizen of Palestine. His only fault - violation of the blockade put on the Palestinian Authority. Two months ago Andrew moved to the territory of the Palestinian Authority and made his home in the refugee camp called Dheysha (near Bethlehem). For that he was thrown into Israeli prison. Today in the court he stated that he doesn’t recognize legitimacy of Israeli government and its judiciary and will not accept any judgment. Besides that Andrew said that he supports Palestinian resistance against occupation and declared ideological closeness to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. After the court hearing Andrew returned to prison. And he will stay there until the next hearing.

    That man is a true Jew, I have more than just mere respect for him, I hope he is set free soon. 

     
  12. Comments
  13. 16:22

    Notes: 36

    Reblogged from mehreenkasana

    mehreenkasana:

    Obama’s Kill List has

    • A perverse “baseball card strategy.”
    • A 17-year-old girl among others.
    • “Militant” redefined to “all military-age males in a strike zone.”
    • Points on the “emotional toll on those who authorize drone strikes.”
    • More reasons for ‘justifying’ the list.

    This murderer is a Nobel laureate. I have no words to describe my disgust. And no, fuck off with your liberal apologetic bullshit.

     
  14. Comments
  15. 16:16

    Notes: 74

    Reblogged from anoncentral

    image: Download

    anoncentral:

A Marijuana arrest is made every 37 seconds. The cost to house just ONE of these NON VIOLENT offenders for ONE year could send that same person to a FOUR YEAR Community College.It is time for education.

    anoncentral:

    A Marijuana arrest is made every 37 seconds. The cost to house just ONE of these NON VIOLENT offenders for ONE year could send that same person to a FOUR YEAR Community College.

    It is time for education.

    (Source: fuckschoolsmokepot)

     
  16. Comments
  17. 22:44 28th May 2012

    Notes: 32

    Reblogged from fucknobigbrother

    image: Download

    thinksquad:

… By “violence” here, I do not mean that anarchism will completely eliminate human violence – the violence that I am talking about here is the morally “justified” and institutionalized initiation of force that is the foundation of State power. The State is by definition a group of individuals who claim the right to initiate the use of force against legally-disarmed citizens in a specific geographical region.
Thus, I think it is reasonable for us to take the approach that if it were possible to run society without a government, this would be a massive net positive.
When we have governments, we inevitably get wars, politically motivated and unjust laws, the incarceration of nonviolent “criminals,” the over-printing of money and the resulting inflation, the enslavement of future generations through immoral deficits, the mis-education of the young, rampant vote buying, endless tax increases, arms sales around the world, unjust subsidies to specific industries, economic and practical inefficiencies of every conceivable kind, the creation of permanent underclasses through welfare and illegal immigration, vast increases in the power and violence of organized crime through restrictions on drugs, prostitution and gambling – the list of State crimes is virtually endless.
When we choose to justify governments, we inevitably choose to justify the crimes of those in power. Choosing government is also choosing war, genocide, enslavement, financial, moral and educational corruption, propaganda, the spread of violence and so on.
You can never get one without the other. Imagining otherwise is like imagining that you can choose to justify the Mafia without also justifying the violence that it uses to maintain its power. We may as well imagine that we can support the troops without simultaneously supporting the murders they commit.
Given the number of bloody and genocidal crimes that orbit the power of the State, surely we can at least be open to the possibility that society can be organized far more effectively and morally without such an evil power at its center. If it turns out that society can run without a State – even haltingly, even imperfectly – then surely we should accept such practical imperfections for the sake of avoiding such rampant and bottomless crimes against humanity. Surely, even if anarchy were proven to produce fewer and worse roads, we could accept some mildly inconvenient and bumpy rides for the sake of releasing billions of people from direct or indirect enslavement to their political masters.
-An excerpt from ‘Practical Anarchy’ by Stefan Molyneux

    thinksquad:

    … By “violence” here, I do not mean that anarchism will completely eliminate human violence – the violence that I am talking about here is the morally “justified” and institutionalized initiation of force that is the foundation of State power. The State is by definition a group of individuals who claim the right to initiate the use of force against legally-disarmed citizens in a specific geographical region.

    Thus, I think it is reasonable for us to take the approach that if it were possible to run society without a government, this would be a massive net positive.

    When we have governments, we inevitably get wars, politically motivated and unjust laws, the incarceration of nonviolent “criminals,” the over-printing of money and the resulting inflation, the enslavement of future generations through immoral deficits, the mis-education of the young, rampant vote buying, endless tax increases, arms sales around the world, unjust subsidies to specific industries, economic and practical inefficiencies of every conceivable kind, the creation of permanent underclasses through welfare and illegal immigration, vast increases in the power and violence of organized crime through restrictions on drugs, prostitution and gambling – the list of State crimes is virtually endless.

    When we choose to justify governments, we inevitably choose to justify the crimes of those in power. Choosing government is also choosing war, genocide, enslavement, financial, moral and educational corruption, propaganda, the spread of violence and so on.

    You can never get one without the other. Imagining otherwise is like imagining that you can choose to justify the Mafia without also justifying the violence that it uses to maintain its power. We may as well imagine that we can support the troops without simultaneously supporting the murders they commit.

    Given the number of bloody and genocidal crimes that orbit the power of the State, surely we can at least be open to the possibility that society can be organized far more effectively and morally without such an evil power at its center. If it turns out that society can run without a State – even haltingly, even imperfectly – then surely we should accept such practical imperfections for the sake of avoiding such rampant and bottomless crimes against humanity. Surely, even if anarchy were proven to produce fewer and worse roads, we could accept some mildly inconvenient and bumpy rides for the sake of releasing billions of people from direct or indirect enslavement to their political masters.

    -An excerpt from ‘Practical Anarchy’ by Stefan Molyneux

     
  18. Comments
  19. Just after France legislators and officials moved to ban Monsanto’s genetically modified strain of GMO maize over environmental and health concerns, the European Union has decided to step in and re-secure Monsanto’s presence in the country — against the very will of the nation itself. This should come as no surprise when considering the fact that the United States ambassador to France, a business partner to George W. Bush, stated back in 2007 that nations who did not accept Monsanto’s GMO crops will be ‘penalized’. In fact, ambassador Craig Stapleton went as far as to say that the nations should be threatened with military-styled trade wars.

    That’s right, it appears the reason for the unprecedented move to maintain Monsanto’s deeply-rooted foothold in France has to do with the fact that the United States and other nations are continually pushing Monsanto’s agenda — even going as far as to threaten military-styled trade wars to those who oppose the company. Monsanto has major connections with political heads that have actually threatened trade wars against nations opposed to GMOs on record. As I reported back in January, WikiLeaks cables surfaced revealing and startling information concerning Monsanto’s deep involvement with back-end politics.

     
  20. Comments