About Me

My photo

I started my Inner Journey several decades ago by 1st learning to meditate & then becoming a teacher & putting people in Contact withe Source, Their Source. I worked with & Sponsored various highly evolved people, Healers, Clairvoyants & Developed Souls who showed me how to utilize their knowledge that strangely most couldn't discern or even hear.
Withe Various Techniques & Tools I've been given or fathomed thru close observation, I have had some interesting experiences & journeys within. This knowledge also made sense of other experiences & preceptions that I encountered thru life'situations thru the years.
Things like past lives or understanding another person patterns have opened to me as have my own. And as fascinating as all that is, my Aim is to Be Freed from this Illusion bringing as many as will come along EveNow. You can live in the World but don't have to take it seriously & in fact Joyfully & Easily get you much further to where you wanto be at any moment. 
I have shared thru my messages several of my inner connections like the ~Unknowable~ which is beyond the Relative & Absolute fields of Life,
Also drawing down The_Grace_of_Ishvara,_Our Almighty Father Mother God/dess & The Transformational Rainbow Forest Odyssey + many other Activations, Techniques & Connections from various teachers & messengers.
If they work & help & Lighten & Enlighten, I'm all for them & Share withose Ready.
And It is time to Get Ready or Not~Change is Upon Each & All of Us Beyond Sci~Fi or Middle Earth or Any Tales or Fables you've heard of.... We Are in the Midst of It.
Everything is Speeding Up SO BE READY!!!!!! 
(To View Older Posts check My Messages  @




Blog Archive


Search Me Blog Matee

Tuesday, May 7, 2013

A Day at the Disclosure Hearings: A game changer?

It's Funny how changing an Illusion can seem so difficult, Especially when people Believe it's0 ReaL,
Un-K-now-able HearTouch of Ishvara's Golden Grace of Our Ascension

----- Original Message -----

From: Richard

To: GalacticJack

Sent: Monday, May 06, 2013 9:47 PM

Subject: Fwd: News from International Metaphysical University for 05/06/2013

Citizen Hearing On Disclosure Day 2: England Has Close Encounter, UFOs Tamper With Nuclear Sites.
IMU Banner

Citizen Hearing On Disclosure Day 2: England Has Close Encounter, UFOs Tamper With Nuclear Sites

May 04, 2013 11:01 pm | admin

The Huffington Post offers great coverage of the Citizen’s Hearing on Disclosure.

Posted: 04/30/2013 10:40 am EDT | Updated: 04/30/2013 6:39 pm EDT
As day two begins at the Citizen Hearing On Disclosure (CHD) in Washington, D.C., the focus on the subject of UFOs turns to the famous multi-witness encounter that took place in 1980 at the dual air base RAF Woodbridge and Bentwaters in England.
In addition to the England case, today’s testimony will feature military personnel describing cases where UFOs reportedly tampered with nuclear missiles.
Click Here For Live Updates
While not an official government hearing on UFOs, the CHD is a five-day congressional-style presentation that brings 40 international researchers and military and scientific witnesses who are testifying before six former members of Congress.
On day one, discussions included the history of global UFO sightings and alleged UFO crashes, like the famous 1947 incident near Roswell, N.M.
There was also testimony of how several previous American presidents showed great interest in UFOs and, in some cases, unsuccessfully attempted to get information about specific UFO issues.


Paul Hellyer is widely known and credited for his work to unify the Canadian Armed Forces. In 2005, he made headlines by announcing that “UFOs are as real as the airplanes flying overhead.” That statement made him the first cabinet-ranked individual in the G8 group of nations to say that UFOs were unequivocably real.
“Since then, I’ve learned a lot from many sources, including a number of the fantastic witnesses that we have heard these last [five] days.”
Among the things Hellyer says he has learned and believes is a particular document that concluded at least four species had been visiting Earth for thousands of years: “This is my own view at this stage, as well. … They are different species and, consequently, may have different agendas. I don’t think we can say that they all have the same agenda any more than we can say that the United States, China and Russia have the same agenda. Our real interests may be similar, but as of now, our perceived interests are still quite far apart.”
“My interest is in about 95 to 98 percent of full disclosure — I know of one or two things that I’m not sure should be in the public domain, at least yet. They will be someday, I’m sure. But just as children survive the idea of the tooth fairy and Santa Claus when they become adult, I think the taxpaying citizens are quite capable of accepting the new and broader reality that we live in a cosmos teeming with life of various sorts.
“The fact that some other civilizations are more advanced than we are may be humbling. But that could be a necessary step in our survival.”
Several of the former members of Congress who presided over the 5-day hearing suggested they would be interested in reuniting to try and take the UFO-ET disclosure issue to the United Nations.
Time will tell…
The technology panel (being sworn in below), consisted of (from left) Dr. Roger Leir, physics engineer Thomas Valone, Dr. Steven Greer and aeronautical engineer Robert Wood.
During this session, Leir, a podiatrist, described the numerous surgeries he’s performed with a medical team in which they removed unusual small objects from people who claimed to have experienced alien abduction.
“In my 50 years of podiatric surgical practice, I have removed literally hundreds of objects from the human foot, including paper, glass, metal and stones.
“All of the individuals involved in my study all presented no noted portal of entry for any of the objects that were removed. There was no visible scar formation and no interruption of the integrity of the skin, even when examination was performed with a magnifying loop. All the individuals in the study presented positive X-rays or CT Scans showing metallic or lesser dense foreign objects.
“In addition, by use of a radio wave frequency detector, we were able to detect that certain radio frequencies in the FM band, were being emitted from the object. All the surgeries we performed were documented with eyewitnesses, video and still photography.
“We find that, in all pathological reports, there is NO inflammatory reaction, there is no rejection reaction. There is nothing that we have found in material science that will produce absolutely no inflammatory reaction in the human body.”
CHD organizer Stephen Bassett announced to the ex-congressional panel that a 15-minute video was about to be shown of a 77-year-old man man, in very bad health, who wanted to take the opportunity to reveal a story of what happened to him while he worked for the CIA under Pres. Dwight Eisenhower in 1958.
Bassett: “In a sense, this video represents the many individuals out there who could not come before a committee like this, who want to talk, but it’s difficult. The vast majority of individuals who have interacted with this issue while working for the government, going back to the 40s, took the information that they had to their grave and did not talk if they were told not to talk.
“This gentleman has received numerous threats from his government not to talk, but he wanted this testimony to be presented and we agreed. He has only been interviewed by two researchers who are here today, Linda Moulton Howe and Richard Dolan.”
It’s a foregone conclusion that the CIA doesn’t routinely acknowledge the identities of those who work for the agency, so we can’t confirm who this man is…we can only present portions of his testimony, as he spoke with UFO historian Richard Dolan (seen at left in the picture below). “X” — as we’ll call him here — recounted how he worked for the CIA on a special project involving the Air Force’s Project Blue Book study of UFOs (which ran for about 20 years before ending in 1969).
X: “Project Blue Book was partially a fraud. But the cases that we got didn’t come from the Pentagon or CIA headquarters. My boss filled me in on Project Blue Book and what they had found so far, as far as greys and aliens and the Roswell incident.”
Dolan: “How did you feel when this got dumped on you?”
X: “Well, I was just kind of overwhelmed with all of this. My boss said we were going to be part of the Eisenhower push to find out about these aliens. We went to the Oval Office. President Eisenhower was there, and Nixon.”
At this point, X goes on to talk about how Eisenhower was upset when he learned that there was activity going on at a base in Nevada (that would later be renamed as Area 51) that the government allegedly had no jurisdiction over. Eisenhower sent X and his boss to the base to find out what was going on there.
X described what they saw when they arrived.
X: “There were different garage door openings and inside they had different saucer crafts. The first one was the Roswell craft — it was kind of crashed up, but apparently every alien had died except for a couple. Later on we viewed the autopsy film and then the colonel said, ‘What we’ve got in here is we’re interviewing a grey alien.’”
Dolan: “How did you feel at that moment?”
X: “I thought, boy, we had no idea we were gonna see the real thing. All we saw was film. My boss was able to go in and have a partial interview. This one looked a little bit Oriental. It didn’t look human as far as the skin tone. It’s brain was a little bit bigger, very, very small nose and the ears were just like holes and the mouth was very small.”
X and his superior went back to Washington to meet with Eisenhower and Nixon again.
X: “Also, Hoover was there. We told them about the alien and the whole situation and he was just totally shocked. He appeared for the first time to be worried. Eisenhower said, ‘We’ve got to keep this thing completely secret.’”

Cong. Kilpatrick (pictured below) appeared very moved by the testimony of the private, commercial and military pilots as well as previous panel witnesses during the week.
“[All this week], I’ve heard some of the most intelligent, scientific and universal knowledge on the topic that I didn’t know I was going to witness. Yesterday, we heard from 12 different countries who have hundreds of years of scientific intelligent information on this subject.
“It behooves us, as human beings, in what is known as the greatest country in the world, to participate in that discussion. To not act like something exists and then to further act like it’s a joke, we do a disservice to our ancestors, to God and to the people of the world.
“I want the world and the universe to continue. And if there is something out there — and I’m not a scientist — there’s a whole lot we don’t know. I think it’s ignorant of any people not to seek out what we need to know to continue the universe.
“I was convinced before this morning’s panel that there probably is something out there, and I’m willing to work the rest of my life to see that, if it is, how we can enhance the universe to see that we all have a better quality of life.”
On the fifth and final day of the Citizen Hearing On Disclosure in Washington, D.C., a group of pilots — private, commercial and military — and former FAA official John Callahan testified about a number of UFO encounters experienced by pilots, and how, in many cases, information about these incidents were deliberately kept from the public.

Gravel says it only takes one country to make a stand and to get the United Nations to open the door again to possibly creating a new agency to look into UFOs.
“Another hearing like this one, or whether it’s in the Congress, probably won’t advance our goals all that much. But there’s no reason why, with the various countries represented here — with the various scholars and military officers — that we wouldn’t try to, within our own communities, to get them to endorse a very simple, straightforward resolution, calling upon the [U.N.] General Assembly.
“All we would need is one country, but I think that we have several countries from South America, and certainly, this group here might have enough influence to get their government to go on record, and to field a resolution creating an agency of the United Nations…specifically with the goal to organize a global conference — not a hearing — of the scholars and scientists that would come together and fund it — both from public and private sources — so that, within a couple of years, we could convene a conference that would command the attention of the world.
“I have no doubt that we could field that kind of a resolution and get it adopted. We can elevate it right to where it really belongs because it’s a global issue — We could elevate it right to the General Assembly of the United Nations.”
While these congressional-style hearings are going on in Washington, there’s an ongoing influx of stories coming out in the media by writers who claim that this is just an exercise in futility among UFO buffs looking for instant publicity, and that the participants — witness panels and the committee of former members of Congress — are involved in nothing but a farce and an easy payday.
The New York Daily News today highlights a statement by U.S. Rep. Peter King of New York, in which he outright ridicules one of the military witnesses at the D.C. hearings, Ret. Air Force Capt. Robert Salas (pictured below).
Salas has a credible background as a weapons controller and launch officer of intercontinental ballistic missiles and has previously spoken about a 1967 incident at Malmstrom Air Force Base in Montana when signals went off indicating an intrusion at the missile site, followed by missiles “going into an unlaunchable, or no-go, mode,” all during the appearance of a UFO over the base.
Salas says he sent documents about this case to King, the former House Homeland Security Chairman and believes King is ignoring him. According to the Daily News, when King was asked about Salas’ claim, here’s how he responded: “I have no idea what the guy is talking about. We are always getting crazy stuff in the mail by people whose brain has been taken over by aliens or something.”
Really, Mr. King? As a representative of the people, is that the proper way to refer to one of many respected military men entrusted with the safety of our country — to just shrug him off by referring to the evidence he sent you as “crazy stuff” and to further ridicule him by basically saying his brain was “taken over by aliens”?
It’s high time that elected officials think twice before making pronouncements about things like UFOs, simply because they either have a personal bias against the subject OR they’ve been told to inflict that kind of attitude on the public.
Either way, a big reason why these people have come together in Washington this week is to try and open a serious look into a subject that doesn’t deserve the kind of ridicule that people like King throw around.
Chinese scientist Sun Shili is a retired foreign ministry official and president of the World Chinese UFO Federation.
“Our federation serves as a communication platform for the global Chinese on all aspects of UFOs, including those in Mainland China, Hong Kong, Taiwan and abroad. Chinese people consider ourselves as the descendants of dragons, which are from outer space in the Chinese culture.
“We call our land as the land of deities or gods and we seek the harmony between people and heaven. [All of these things] are very relevant with the hearing that is taking place today.”
Shili told the CHD committee that he was a government diplomat and university professor, but since the 1970s, he started looking into UFOs and the mysteries of the universe.
“Everyone on this planet is looking for our roots in the universe. We have the right to know and discover. Any attempt to cover-up is unacceptable. Also statistics of the China UFO groups [of which there are about 50,000 members] show that, out of 1.3 billion people, we have close to tens of millions of people who are UFO enthusiasts.”
The second panel consisting of international experts is offering testimony about UFOs. The individuals (being sworn-in in the image below) are (from left to right) Antonio Huneeus (Chile-U.S.), Nick Pope (U.K.), Grant Cameron (Canada), Sun Shili (People’s Republic Of China) and Roberto Pinotti (Italy).
The committee of former members of Congress appeared to be moved and highly interested to hear the testimony of the first international panel of the day, especially the riveting close encounter aerial “dogfight” described by Peruvian fighter pilot, Col. Oscar Santa-Maria.
Cong. Darlene Hooley (Dem/Oregon) closed the morning session with praise for the panel:
“I want to thank our panel for being here today. This has been really interesting and your openness and what’s happening in each of your countries has been a real eye-opener for the rest of us.”
Possibly the most intriguing testimony offered today so far came from a former 25-year Peruvian air force fighter pilot. Col. Oscar Santa-Maria (pictured below). In 1980, he was ordered to takeoff and shoot down a sphere-shaped UFO that was in restricted airspace near an air base. The encounter lasted more than 20 minutes.
“These were 22 minutes where we went up and down, it went around, and it was trying to avoid me while I was pursuing it and I was trying to fire. When I first fired, these were bursts of 30 millimeter shells — a single one can destroy a truck. And I shot 64, a barrage of fire, and nothing happened at all, and that’s what was so surprising.
“The possibility of NOT hitting my target was practically impossible. I’ve won awards for marksmanship, and that’s why they sent me up there to chase this thing. The possibility of my missing it was zero.”
The object Santa-Maria was chasing was about 30 feet in diameter with a dome on top, no visible engine, wings or windows. He told the committee he tried to figure out how to better attack the unknown craft.
“I tried different positions. When it went up, it had supersonic speed. When I moved to the side of the UFO at 1.3 Mach, it stopped, and then, in a matter of seconds, it achieved 1.2 Mach without any engines! This is something that nobody, no craft can do, to just go from zero to 1.2 Mach, vertically, to reach my same position — it was able to anticipate my moves and then follow me.
“Once I landed, I met with intelligence officers, and we looked at all catalogues to see what possible spy object this might have been, but there was nothing similar to what I had observed, and we were unaware of any type of technology [like this] on Earth that existed.”

In the first panel session of the day, former Brazilian chemistry teacher A.J. Gevaerd spoke on the many UFO cases in Brazil, specifically in the area of the Amazon. He described a committee in 1977 created by the Brazilian air force to investigate the cases. The committee was known as Operation Saucer. Gevaerd presented the committee with a 440-page report called “UFOs In The Amazon” (see below)
Today’s testimony is being presented by several officials and military personnel from different countries, including Brazil, Uruguay, Peru and Argentina.
Some technical glitches in the audio translation of several individuals made it difficult to understand what they were actually saying. Hopefully that will be fixed and not be a problem for the rest of the day.
Day 4 of the Citizen Hearing On Disclosure will offer international testimony of the UFO subject. Committee member Sen. Mike Gravel (seen below) thinks that will be significant:
“I think that the best effort we have for bringing visibility to the people of the world of this issue … we could go to the United Nations. Now, I don’t think we’d have a prayer in the Security Council, because it’s controlled by us and that just wouldn’t happen.
“But what would happen in the General Assembly if we were to introduce a resolution? I’ll bet you it would pass. They would fund some part of it — the rest of the funding could come from private sources, and we would have the most awe-inspiring world event on this subject within a couple or three years.”
French told the committee about an incident he witnessed in the late 1960s in Alamogordo, N.M., to complete his annual refresher course in an altitude chamber, which tested the effects of high altitude on humans.
“While there, I learned of an accident a few miles away in the direction of White Sands [missile range]. A short time later, I witnessed the takeoff of a prototype fighter aircraft that I neither recognized or knew what it was.
“The aircraft took off at a very high rate of speed and fired a rocket, five inches in diameter and about six feet long, about the same size as some of the modern air-to-air aerial rockets.
“Afterward [I was told] there was an unknown number of humanoids, either killed or injured. The parts of the casualties were taken to base operations at Holloman Air Force Base [in New Mexico]. The only parts of the craft that I was allowed to see had markings that appeared to be Arabic or some language I didn’t understand.
“Later I learned the parts and the casualties were transported to Wright-Patterson Air Force Base [in Ohio] and turned over to the Foreign Technology Division.”
This is not the first time that French has come forward to reveal intriguing UFO-related information.
Last year, he told The Huffington Post exclusively that there wasn’t just one UFO that crashed near Roswell, N.M. in 1947 — there were two!
Several people make up the panel offering testimony about the events surrounding the 1947 crash of an alleged UFO outside the town of Roswell, N.M.
The panel consists of (from left in the image below) Denice Marcell, Jesse Marcel III, Col./Dr. Jesse Marcel Jr., Ret. USAR Lt. Col. Kevin Randle, former nuclear physicist Stanton T. Friedman and researcher/author Donald Schmitt.
Marcel Jr. has a distinguished career as both a Navy and National Guard officer as well as being a military flight surgeon. He told the Washington CHD committee about the night in 1947 (while he was 11 years old) when his father Jesse Marcel, the intelligence officer from the Roswell Army Air Field, came home with debris of whatever the object was that crashed on a nearby ranch:
“I was awakened by my dad who was returning from an assignment to collect debris of unknown origin from a ranch out of Roswell. Knowing that he had seen something very special, he wanted my mother and myself to look at this also and said, ‘You’ll never see this again.’
“He brought us into the kitchen where there was this strange debris on the kitchen floor that he had pre-positioned. He said, ‘Look at this — I think this is what you call a flying saucer or remains thereof.’
“The debris consisted of three components: there was a very tough metallic foil; there was black plastic debris, like a broken phonograph record; but the strangest thing I saw was an I-beam in the wreckage. There were symbols written along the inside surface of it. They were of a purplish-violet hue, semi-reflective of light.”
Marcel Jr. went on to recount how his father was subsequently ordered to fly the material to Gen. Roger Ramey’s office in Fort Worth, Texas.
“When my dad got home, he sat my mother and myself down and said, ‘You will never talk about this — this is a non-event.’ I never discussed this with my friends or anybody else until Stanton Friedman interviewed my dad in 1978.”

The second panel of the day, comprised of (from left in image below) Grant Cameron, Stanton Friedman, Linda Moulton Howe and Robert Wood present testimony on a series of documents, known as “Majestic,” that reportedly reveal the story of presidential and military authorization and cover-up of UFOs and possible alien occupants.
Wood, retired from a 43-year career at McDonnell Douglas Aerospace Corp., has spent more than 30 years investigating UFOs, including years of research to authenticate the Majestic Documents:
“The identification of one aspect of a questioned document as being anomalous often results in a skeptic accepting none of the rest of the document, even though it might be filled with accurate information. It seems to be accepted in the intelligence community that faked documents usually — if not often — contain much valid information to help get it accepted as genuine throughout.
“The conclusion I’ve come to is incredibly wild: that those in charge have been successful in keeping secret the greatest story of mankind while covertly spending staggering sums to create hidden underground resources and reverse-engineer the technology. Until we can quantify the alien threat, how can we know whether these actions are good or bad? Let us hope, maybe with the help of one race of good aliens, that God will maybe do the right thing…I think the American people deserve [the truth] — we’ve paid for it.”

Researcher Linda Moulton Howe discussed her many years investigating strange animal mutilations that have been linked to UFO sightings.
“The first global media report about this phenomena was in September of 1967 when a female horse named Lady was found dead on a ranch in southern Colorado. The horse’s entire skull and long neck had been stripped of flesh and every organ in the chest of that horse had been surgically excised, according to a medical doctor. There was no blood anywhere — not in the animal, not around the animal and nowhere nearby.”
NOTE: Astute reader (and HuffPost blogger) Alejandro Rojas pointed out that this entry was originally titled as Day 2. It has been corrected so as not to confuse anyone!
6:05 PM – 04/30/2013
Lectures To End Second Day
Winding up the second day of the CHD will be evening lectures from former nuclear physicist Stanton Friedman, Canadian researcher Grant Cameron and UFO historian Richard Dolan.
Wednesday’s plate includes UFO documents and the legendary 1947 UFO crash at Roswell, NM.
Cong. Roscoe Bartlett gets a little testy about the press coverage so far about this week’s Citizen Hearing On Disclosure:
“I’ve been looking at some of the press clippings from yesterday’s session and the government has been quite successful in relegating this issue to the lunatic fringe. I’m going to comment on only one article. It says ‘The mock Congress hearing on aliens is heavy on real-life Mulders and not Scullys. In the “X-Files,” Agent Mulder believes in all things: little green men, Roswell, men-in-black, whatever, and Agent Dana Scully believes in science.
“‘Scully forces Mulder to find hard evidence that there’s a massive conspiracy to cover-up aliens’ existence. The trouble with this week’s alien panel (we’re an alien panel now) at the National Press Club is that any of the participating members of Congress who might naturally be a Scully have been incentived to suspend their disbelief. Because the Citizen Hearing foundation is paying them $20,000 plus expenses to listen to the testimony.’”
“That’s just insulting, that we can be bought for $20,000 — that’s ridiculous! It goes on to say that …’former member Roscoe Bartlett, in an opening statement, Bartlett said he hadn’t fulfilled his duty in office by failing to hold hearings on extraterresrtrials…’ I NEVER SAID THAT! … I never said that I believed in extraterrestrials. I believe that there are sightings out there that cannot be easily explained away.”
“‘Compounding the problem of eyebrow-raising testimony is that several of these politicians have reputations for being a little wacky.’”
The afternoon session focuses on the numerous cases of UFOs seen in the vicinity of American nuclear missile sites. One of the witnesses, retired Air Force Capt. Bruce Fenstermacher described seeing a cigar-shaped UFO above a Wyoming nuclear base in 1976.
UFO historian Richard Dolan talked about how the Freedom of Information Act has yielded important documents related to military encounters with UFOs.

Cong. Roscoe Bartlett engaged Sgt. James Penniston (see images below) re. the UFO he approached on the ground during the 1980 multiple witness encounter in England’s Rendlesham Forest:
Bartlett: “You were there when the craft took off?” Penniston: “Yes, sir.” Bartlett: “Was there any sound?”Penniston: “The craft generated more lighting and that concerned me. I wasn’t sure if it was going to explode, so I took a somewhat defensive position. It rose off the ground, went to tree level, momentary hovered, then took off in the blink of an eye. The things that it didn’t do was stuf that it should’ve done. I was hoping for air displacement — all aircraft do that. I was hoping for aircraft sound — all aircraft do that.”
As day two of the Citizen Hearing On Disclosure unfolds, the committee of former members of Congress are listening to the testimony of eyewitnesses to the famous 1980 Rendlesham Forest incident in England that involved many military personnel.
Later in the day, the committee will hear testimony of more military eyewitnesses to UFO activity over American nuclear missile sites.
4:51 PM – 04/29/2013
End Of The First Day
Many points of view from committee members and witnesses were offered on this first day of the Citizen Hearing On Disclosure.
With four days of testimony still to come, it would be interesting to see if any type of skepticism will rear its head and to see how the folks involved handle or approach a skeptical point of view about UFOs and a possible ET presence on Earth.
Check back on Tuesday to see…
4:14 PM – 04/29/2013
A Tale Of Two Steve’s
Dr. Steven Greer: “Everything about what extraterrestrials show of themselves would look like magic to us…if you’re dealing with civilizations that have actually arrived here from somewhere else, they’re probably doing it faster than the speed of light…possibly at the speed of thought…consciousness and mind are the real final frontier – not space. We are not alone in the universe and we need to have a peaceful interplanetary, interstellar initiative. We need to figure out how we’re going to advance.”
Political Activist Stephen Bassett talked about how the media hasn’t properly reported important UFO news. “If some very tough reporters can get out there and ask the right questions, it’s going to get really interesting.”
The following image shows Greer (L) and Bassett (R)
3:40 PM – 04/29/2013
Clinton Administration UFO Interest
Grant Cameron’s testimony on Clinton administration unsuccessful attempt to find out UFO information…
Linda Moulton Howe on reported UFO abductions and the possible manipulation of the human mind. She tells a story about a military person who told her he was on a team that, in 1978, was assigned to investigate a town that was allegedly flooded by extraterrestrials.
Researcher Grant Cameron discusses 1,000 documents he received via the Freedom of Information Act about how Rockefeller tried to get the Clinton administration to look into UFOs, especially the 1947 UFO crash in Roswell, N.M., and how President Clinton issued a challenge, saying if there was a UFO at Roswell, he was never told about it.
Cameron talks about how Bill and Hillary Clinton met with Rockefeller at his ranch to discuss UFOs.
“There are key documents from 1995 that point out how Hillary and her staff helped draft a UFO disclosure letter that would be sent to the president.”
Dr. Steven Greer began the afternoon session describing how he went from being an emergency room doctor to a leading advocate for UFO-ET disclosure. Greer is also executive producer of a new documentary, “Sirius,” which focuses on his claims of alleged existing technologies that might change the world.
“Sirius” is also about the unveiling of DNA analysis of a 6-inch-tall humanoiddiscovered 10 years ago in the Atacama Desert of Chile. Dubbed Ata, there is ongoing controversy as to its origin and what, exactly the DNA reveals, according to a new report by Greer.
Cong. Bartlett: “Whether there are UFOs or extraterrestrials is not the issue — it’s a constitutional issue more than anything else. In his final public speech as he left office, Eisenhower warned the public against the military industrial complex, but his original speech called it the military industrial congressional complex, but he took out the world congressional. I think Congress owes the American people a hearing on this subject. There may be nothing to UFOs, but you have the right to petition the government about it.”
Cong. Kilpatrick: ”I don’t know if the answer is to have another congressional hearing. I agree that coming together to acknowledge this problem is urgent. Will the Air Force ever come to this point, and what can this issue do to help all of us.”
French: “Something’s got to be done.”
Sheehan: “The altering of consciousness about UFOs will have to come through religious institutions.”
Dolan: “If there’s an energy paradigm solution to UFOs, that’s worth everything we can do to get it all out in the open.”
Sen. Gravel: “Could all of you draft a new U.N.-type proposal by the end of this week that can help us become globalists vs. nationalists?”
Read More
share on Twitter Like Citizen Hearing On Disclosure Day 2: England Has Close Encounter, UFOs Tamper With Nuclear Sites on Facebook

A Day at the Disclosure Hearings: A game changer?

May 04, 2013 10:45 pm | admin

by Deborah Lindsey
UFO Disclosure Hearings
I have to say that I really didn’t know what to expect when I plopped my butt in the car for the three-hour drive to spend the day at the Citizen’s Disclosure Hearings in DC. The event was both promising and, well, ODD in that I had never heard of anyone doing anything like this before. And you know how it is when you encounter something BRAND NEW, you kind of have to wrap your mind around it.
So thankfully IMU Dean of Ufology Kelly Weary was very encouraging because it was the impetus I needed to take a day away from the computer to head out into the real world of Ufology. And man, am I glad I did!
So to the best of my understanding, here is what this thing was.
This man named Stephen Bassett was the brains and brawn behind the whole thing. He’s one of these very zealous activists who really believes that disclosure is a game changer. He’s devoted to the nth degree. I heard that he spent his inheritance on an unsuccessful run for congress (wow) and since then he has lived bare bones, outside of the matrix that most people swim in, to advance the cause. I have to say that I find this level of devotion admirable, though it screams of bit of the martyr. But at the same time, man it is just really impressive.
So after years of trying to change the system from the inside out, he decided to look at the problem of disclosure from a different angle. And we all know what happens when you do that! Magic! After years of trying to get Congress to hold a hearing on the issue of UFO’s, something which hasn’t happened since the 1940′s, he decided to do it himself! It’s really quite brilliant, don’t you think?
In some ways this is like IMU. For years, I tried to find a college who already did this. It just seemed so obvious to me, so NECESSARY, and when it became clear that no one else was going to do it, (REALLY do it instead of the sort of short-hand versions that are out there) I stepped up and put one foot in front of the other until IMU was born.
So here was Stephen Bassett sort of doing the same thing. Instead of waiting on someone in Congress to put on the hearing, he did it himself.
So then the walls and the barriers started to show up, as you know they will.
rebecca and grant cameron
Grant Cameron and Rebecca Hardcastle Wright at the UFO Disclosure Citizen’s Hearing on Disclosure at the National Press Club, April/May 2013.
But he did it. He pulled it off.
That alone is herculean.
So he looked for a location and he chose the Washington Press Club. It doesn’t get any better than that. And I gotta tell you, the event was first class all the way.
Then he had to put together a congressional panel. Well, that’s no easy feat since everyone knows that even saying you believe in UFOs is a career killer for a politician. Look at the career of someone like Dennis Kucinich. He was outed for a sighting he had many years before. And despite the fact that other credible witnesses corroborated the evidence, he was immediately labeled a kook. To this day, you almost never see a write up on him that doesn’t mention the UFO sighting. It has made him a laughingstock and everyone knows it. Worse, it has mitigated the career of a sincerely good man who is open-minded and sincerely working to help the people. So others look at that and they know not to go near the issue of UFOs with a ten foot pole.
So finding a credible panel to hear and question the testimony was no small feat. Ultimately he compiled a panel of people who are retired from the congress. They were credible and really did a great job. You could see that they took the job seriously and were certainly not advancing any particular agenda.
Over the course of the week, from what others were saying, they underwent a huge transition. The power and credibility of the testimonials was convincing even to the most hardened skeptic. I have to admit that Bassett did an amazing job of choosing his witnesses. Wow. They were impressive and everyone could see it was the real deal.
Even for me, who is already a “believer” (which is a silly term when you’ve moved beyond believer into “duh, of course”), the evidence was mind-blowing. IMU professor Richard Dolan was particularly impressive as was soon-to-be IMU professor Grant Cameron. I’ll be posting a second article from the Huffington Post that includes information on the actual hearings themselves.
So for five days, these ex-congressmen and congresswomen who were brave enough to come forth and participate, heard testimony from experts. The experts presented their information (about 10 minutes a piece) and then they were questioned by the panel.
The goal here, as far as I could tell, was to essentially force through the idea of disclosure. At least that’s how it looks to me. If the government won’t do it, then the people will. It was a great idea.
But it didn’t really take into account the fact that UFOs are also a career-killer for journalists. Very few journalists have the courage and conviction to stand up and address the issue from an actual straight-forward and credible approach. And so most of the journalists who covered it did it from the veil of ridicule, as they always do. To me, it’s the sign of the ultimate coward, but when money is on the line, when reputation is on the line, careers are on the line, etc, people are easily frightened. Add to this the fact that the mainstream media is owned by a very few people, as was pointedly noted by IMU instructor Richard Dolan, and it becomes obvious why the hearings, by and large, didn’t receive the quality of coverage that they deserved.
While I was only there for one day, I was utterly amazed at the quality of the testimony. I was particularly impressed by Former Canadian Defense Minister Paul Hellyer. Man was this guy the bomb! lol. Before I knew who he was IMU professor Rebecca Hardcastle Wright (who I had the opportunity to meet for the first time and who is an absolute DELIGHT) introduced us in the hallway prior to his testimony. There was something about this man that instead of shaking his hand I went in for the hug! lol. Yes, I hugged him. I think it surprised him but to me it was an indication of how much this man just exudes goodness. He’s 90 years old and has an air of dignity and confidence mixed with humility that you rarely see anywhere. He stands tall and straight, probably 6 foot 2 or 3 and is dignified in his motions. And in the midst of the kindness, you there was this…power. But like I said, it’s a different kind of power—it was the kind of power that exuded goodness. I don’t remember coming across that combination before in my life.
So then he got up and he testified and he was just a mind-blower. He said things that just left my jaw on the floor! I couldn’t believe that someone who had been in his position would stand up there in this capacity and say the truth. It was more than I ever expected. If you get a chance to watch the hearings (which are available to stream online for under $5!), make sure you watch Hellyer’s testimony. It was mind-blowing.
So all in all, we have to ask the question of whether or not this was the game-changer that Bassett was going for. I guess only time will tell. I know that for anyone who is sitting on the fence, who is willing to actually listen to the testimony, they won’t be on the fence for long. And I guess for every person who sees just how credible and how IMPORTANT this issue is, we are closer and closer to hitting critical mass. As for whether or not it will get the attention of congress or other political or journalistic leaders, I doubt it. And I really don’t think that any of the people hired to hear the testimony will do anything with it. There simply wasn’t an obvious impetus for that. In many ways they felt like poor players who had strut and fret their hour upon the stage but then would likely be heard from no more. Actors of a sort in a very life-like play. But I do think that the ripple effects will show themselves for many years to come. And that makes it worthwhile for sure.
All in all I give Bassett a big thumbs up and I highly recommend taking the time to listen to the archives of the testimony.

Read More
share on Twitter Like A Day at the Disclosure Hearings: A game changer? on Facebook

How To Change A Habit

May 04, 2013 04:17 pm | admin

by Serge Kahili King
When I talk about habits, I am including personal behavior patterns as well as relationship patterns and patterns of repeating circumstances. I am not saying that anyone necessarily creates all these patterns.
However, I am saying that these kinds of patterns do not keep repeating themselves without our help. The solution is not to blame others, or luck or fate. The solution is to change our own behavior in some way. Which brings us to our first point.
The most important factor in changing any kind of habit is motivation. Motivation is poorly understood, because it includes two different, but related, concepts that are equally vital for a habit change to be effective.
The first concept is desire. In order to change a habit, there has to be something you want that is different from what you have. This is usually called a “motive,” a reason for making a change. Most commonly, this is a desire to get away from some kind of pain.
That is also the weakest kind of motive. That’s because it takes a lot more energy to move away from something rather than toward something. I’ll explain why a little further on. Just note that a motive for something has more power and less strain than a motive against something.
The assumption I’m making now is that you have a habit–or a habitual situation–that you want to change. So think about what you’d like to have instead of what you do have, then think about the benefits of having something better, and pela no! There you have it! Your motive!
That’s only the first half of the first part, though. The second part of the first half comes from the other meaning of motivation: action. It doesn’t matter how positive or worthy the motive is, nothing happens to change a thing until we take action.
If you want to stop smoking, you have to do whatever it takes to help you stop smoking, and then, at some point, you have to actually stop smoking. If you want to have better relationships, you have to learn what better relationships are like, and act accordingly.
If being unsuccessful seems to be a habit, you have to learn all you can about successful people, and do what they do, in your own way. The same is true if being unhappy seems to be a habit. Study what happy people do, and practice.
Now we have reached the really tough part: taking action. Habits, even bad ones, are comfortable, because they are easy to do and they hold few surprises. New habits tend to be uncomfortable, because it takes time to become skilled at them and they usually hold lots of surprises.
By the way, for the benefit of anyone who doesn’t know this yet, you can’t get rid of bad habits. You can only exchange them for new habits. Smokers learn how to be non-smokers. Unsuccessful people learn how to be successful. Unhappy people learn how to be happy.
It’s time to take a look at what it takes to change a habit once you know what you want and have begun the process. The next thing is concentration. You have to practice the new way of thinking, feeling, and acting until it becomes a habit.
One thing that helps concentration is the strength of the desire you have to change. How much do you really want the benefits of changing? If you discover that the benefits of not changing outweigh the benefits of changing, to you at least, then nothing you try will work.
You can increase the level of desire–and therefore concentration–by imagining the benefits in detail and allowing yourself to get excited about them. You can also find as many ways as possible of reminding yourself of the benefits, because they are easy to forget in the middle of an old habit or under stress.
The third thing after motivation and concentration is confidence. This means not allowing doubt to slow you down or make you give up. It doesn’t mean to be completely free of doubt. Even Superman has his doubts. Having doubts is not the problem.
Whether there is a problem depends on what you do when doubts appear. Too many people take this as a sign of failure, when it’s only a sign that you are beginning to change. You disempower doubts by ignoring them, chasing them away, or replacing them.
What do you replace them with? Positive words (like strong affirmations, decisions, or self commands), positive images (of the benefits, or of yourself as you will be when the new habit is working), and positive feelings (based on good memories and good expectations).
Another excellent thing that helps weaken doubt is self appreciation. Give yourself positive acknowledgment for every little good step forward and ignore or declare the unimportance of any steps backward. Treat giant steps forward as being equal in importance to baby steps. As a wise old man once said: If you want to change your life, you have to change your life.
Read More
share on Twitter Like How To Change A Habit on Facebook

Today’s Inspiration: Joe Gallenberger

May 01, 2013 12:34 pm | admin

Joe is the creator of SyncCreation psychokinesis manifestation course and the author of Inner Vegas: Creating Miracles, Abundance and Health.
If I could share 500 words to inspire, this is the important wisdom I’d want to pass along to others…
I have found that applying these principles consistently creates a life of miracles and joy.
  • When starting to focus on something that you desire to create, invite your intentions to have surprisingly positive results. Be open to the delightfully unexpected.
  • View the physical world as delicate and changeable—and the spiritual world as solid, strong, real, and constant. Spirit is the foundation from which to change the physical.
  • Positive manifestation power is enhanced by positive energy. The highest quality and most powerful energy is a loving heart. So live in wide-open-hearted gratitude, compassion, and praise of yourself, all others, and the universe. Appreciating beauty and grace in all their forms can help take you there.
  • Use the affirmation: “In brother/sisterhood with all, I now rise up and claim my dominion”, to reinforce your position of responsibility and effectiveness.
  • Being well-grounded is a key secret to strong creation. Bring your spirit fully into your body; suffuse your body with energy and light; encourage your body and emotions to speak to you freely as they are brimming with wise guidance.There is terrific power in your shadow (the unexpressed and acknowledged parts of self) so be courageous in compassionately seeing yourself as you are in all your glory and glitches. Then feel your connection with the earth, and receive her sacred energy, so that you are fully spirit and flesh at the same time.
  • To form your goals, discover what would make your heart sing if unfettered by limits. See and feel your dream as real right now, fully experiencing how good this manifestation will be for you and how it will benefit others.
  • Detach from results with full trust that goodness will come to you – for you are truly a sacred being to whom all good is available. Refresh your energy and visualizations organically when it feels right to do so. Obsessiveness implies lack of trust and is counterproductive. Remember – patience sweetens passion!For example, are you are more afraid of being jobless than you are in your desire for the best job in the universe for yourself? Fear truly is a prayer for what you do not want. Remember – Fear is expensive and love is priceless, choose wisely! Fear in all its forms, from procrastination, boredom, doubt, cynicism, impatience, self-criticism, laziness etc., can be very challenging to release, especially if it is held in life-long patterns. Use meditation, friends, coaches, and courses to help you identify and release these limits. Yet sometimes all that is needed is to simply, non-judgmentally notice a fear, see that it no longer serves you, and then just gently bubble it away.
  • Send positive energy to everyone, seeing them in their maximum soul potential for this attracts others to help and guide you. Be joyfully generous with yourself and others, in terms of money, smiles, time, attention, and thoughts, and the universe will be generous with you.
Happy Manifesting!
Read More
share on Twitter Like Today’s Inspiration: Joe Gallenberger on Facebook

Everything Is Rigged: The Biggest Price-Fixing Scandal Ever

Apr 30, 2013 05:16 pm | admin

Geeze. Who’d a thunk that Rolling Stone would be the ones to finally bring this all to light. Kudos to Matt Taibbi and to Rolling Stone for bringing this to light. Let’s hope it’s a sign of the times. As more and more light is shown on the darkness, it can only crumble beneath them. We have been in the dark ages for too long. It is time to bring this sort of corruption to the surface and wipe it out. It can be done and this is proof. Now we all need to surround Mr. Taibbi in the light of protection because you know he’ll have a target (or a drone?) on his head now.

The Illuminati were amateurs. The second huge financial scandal of the year reveals the real international conspiracy: There’s no price the big banks can’t fix

Illustration by Victor Juhasz
April 25, 2013 1:00 PM ET
Conspiracy theorists of the world, believers in the hidden hands of the Rothschilds and the Masons and the Illuminati, we skeptics owe you an apology. You were right. The players may be a little different, but your basic premise is correct: The world is a rigged game. We found this out in recent months, when a series of related corruption stories spilled out of the financial sector, suggesting the world’s largest banks may be fixing the prices of, well, just about everything.
You may have heard of the Libor scandal, in which at least three – and perhaps as many as 16 – of the name-brand too-big-to-fail banks have been manipulating global interest rates, in the process messing around with the prices of upward of $500 trillion (that’s trillion, with a “t”) worth of financial instruments. When that sprawling con burst into public view last year, it was easily the biggest financial scandal in history – MIT professor Andrew Lo even said it “dwarfs by orders of magnitude any financial scam in the history of markets.”
That was bad enough, but now Libor may have a twin brother. Word has leaked out that the London-based firm ICAP, the world’s largest broker of interest-rate swaps, is being investigated by American authorities for behavior that sounds eerily reminiscent of the Libor mess. Regulators are looking into whether or not a small group of brokers at ICAP may have worked with up to 15 of the world’s largest banks to manipulate ISDAfix, a benchmark number used around the world to calculate the prices of interest-rate swaps.
Interest-rate swaps are a tool used by big cities, major corporations and sovereign governments to manage their debt, and the scale of their use is almost unimaginably massive. It’s about a $379 trillion market, meaning that any manipulation would affect a pile of assets about 100 times the size of the United States federal budget.
It should surprise no one that among the players implicated in this scheme to fix the prices of interest-rate swaps are the same megabanks – including Barclays, UBS, Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase and the Royal Bank of Scotland – that serve on the Libor panel that sets global interest rates. In fact, in recent years many of these banks have already paid multimillion-dollar settlements for anti-competitive manipulation of one form or another (in addition to Libor, some were caught up in an anti-competitive scheme, detailed in Rolling Stone last year, to rig municipal-debt service auctions). Though the jumble of financial acronyms sounds like gibberish to the layperson, the fact that there may now be price-fixing scandals involving both Libor and ISDAfix suggests a single, giant mushrooming conspiracy of collusion and price-fixing hovering under the ostensibly competitive veneer of Wall Street culture.
The Scam Wall Street Learned From the Mafia
Why? Because Libor already affects the prices of interest-rate swaps, making this a manipulation-on-manipulation situation. If the allegations prove to be right, that will mean that swap customers have been paying for two different layers of price-fixing corruption. If you can imagine paying 20 bucks for a crappy PB&J because some evil cabal of agribusiness companies colluded to fix the prices of both peanuts and peanut butter, you come close to grasping the lunacy of financial markets where both interest rates and interest-rate swaps are being manipulated at the same time, often by the same banks.
“It’s a double conspiracy,” says an amazed Michael Greenberger, a former director of the trading and markets division at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and now a professor at the University of Maryland. “It’s the height of criminality.”
The bad news didn’t stop with swaps and interest rates. In March, it also came out that two regulators – the CFTC here in the U.S. and the Madrid-based International Organization of Securities Commissions – were spurred by the Libor revelations to investigate the possibility of collusive manipulation of gold and silver prices. “Given the clubby manipulation efforts we saw in Libor benchmarks, I assume other benchmarks – many other benchmarks – are legit areas of inquiry,” CFTC Commissioner Bart Chilton said.
But the biggest shock came out of a federal courtroom at the end of March – though if you follow these matters closely, it may not have been so shocking at all – when a landmark class-action civil lawsuit against the banks for Libor-related offenses was dismissed. In that case, a federal judge accepted the banker-defendants’ incredible argument: If cities and towns and other investors lost money because of Libor manipulation, that was their own fault for ever thinking the banks were competing in the first place.
“A farce,” was one antitrust lawyer’s response to the eyebrow-raising dismissal.
“Incredible,” says Sylvia Sokol, an attorney for Constantine Cannon, a firm that specializes in antitrust cases.
All of these stories collectively pointed to the same thing: These banks, which already possess enormous power just by virtue of their financial holdings – in the United States, the top six banks, many of them the same names you see on the Libor and ISDAfix panels, own assets equivalent to 60 percent of the nation’s GDP – are beginning to realize the awesome possibilities for increased profit and political might that would come with colluding instead of competing. Moreover, it’s increasingly clear that both the criminal justice system and the civil courts may be impotent to stop them, even when they do get caught working together to game the system.
If true, that would leave us living in an era of undisguised, real-world conspiracy, in which the prices of currencies, commodities like gold and silver, even interest rates and the value of money itself, can be and may already have been dictated from above. And those who are doing it can get away with it. Forget the Illuminati – this is the real thing, and it’s no secret. You can stare right at it, anytime you want.
Read more:
Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook
Read More
share on Twitter Like Everything Is Rigged: The Biggest Price-Fixing Scandal Ever on Facebook

Harvard Study Confirms Fluoride Reduces Children’s IQ

Apr 30, 2013 05:08 pm | admin

by Dr. Joseph Mercola
Posted: 01/28/2013 11:20 am
A recently-published Harvard University meta-analysis funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has concluded that children who live in areas with highly fluoridated water have “significantly lower” IQ scores than those who live in low fluoride areas.
In a 32-page report that can be downloaded free of charge from Environmental Health Perspectives, the researchers said:
A recent report from the U.S. National Research Council (NRC 2006) concluded that adverse effects of high fluoride concentrations in drinking water may be of concern and that additional research is warranted. Fluoride may cause neurotoxicity in laboratory animals, including effects on learning and memory …To summarize the available literature, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies on increased fluoride exposure in drinking water and neurodevelopmental delays. We specifically targeted studies carried out in rural China that have not been widely disseminated, thus complementing the studies that have been included in previous reviews and risk assessment reports …
Findings from our meta-analyses of 27 studies published over 22 years suggest an inverse association between high fluoride exposure and children’s intelligence … The results suggest that fluoride may be a developmental neurotoxicant that affects brain development at exposures much below those that can cause toxicity in adults …
Serum-fluoride concentrations associated with high intakes from drinking-water may exceed 1 mg/L, or 50 Smol/L, thus more than 1000-times the levels of some other neurotoxicants that cause neurodevelopmental damage. Supporting the plausibility of our findings, rats exposed to 1 ppm (50 Smol/L) of water-fluoride for one year showed morphological alterations in the brain and increased levels of aluminum in brain tissue compared with controls …
In conclusion, our results support the possibility of adverse effects of fluoride exposures on children’s neurodevelopment. Future research should formally evaluate dose-response relations based on individual-level measures of exposure over time, including more precise prenatal exposure assessment and more extensive standardized measures of neurobehavioral performance, in addition to improving assessment and control of potential confounders.
Studies Have Repeatedly Linked Fluoride to Reduced IQ and Brain Damage
There are so many scientific studies showing the direct, toxic effects of fluoride on your body, it’s truly remarkable that it’s NOT considered a scientific consensus by now. Despite the evidence against it, fluoride is still added to 70 percent of U.S. public drinking water supplies.
It amazes me that the medical (and dental) communities are so stubbornly resistant to connect the dots when it comes to the skyrocketing increase of cognitive decline in adults and behavioral issues in children (ADD, ADHD, depression and learning disabilities of all kinds). In fact, there have been more than 23 human studies and 100 animal studies linking fluoride to brain damage. Fluoride can also increase manganese absorption, compounding problems, since manganese in drinking water has also been linked to lower IQ in children.
Reported effects of fluoride on your brain include:
• Reduction in nicotinic acetylcholine receptors
• Damage to your hippocampus
• Formation of beta-amyloid plaques (the classic brain abnormality in Alzheimer’s disease)
• Reduction in lipid content
• Damage to purkinje cells
• Exacerbation of lesions induced by iodine deficiency
• Impaired antioxidant defense systems
• Increased uptake of aluminum
• Accumulation of fluoride in your pineal gland
Six Facts You Need to Know About Water Fluoridation
Harmful Effects Have Been Known for Half a Century
What is perhaps most surprising is that the harmful effects of fluoride have been known by conventional medical organizations for over half a century. For example, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) stated in their Sept. 18, 1943 issue that fluorides are general protoplasmic poisons that change the permeability of the cell membrane by certain enzymes. And, an editorial published in the Journal of the American Dental Association on Oct. 1, 1944, stated:
Drinking water containing as little as 1.2 ppm fluoride will cause developmental disturbances. We cannot run the risk of producing such serious systemic disturbances. The potentialities for harm outweigh those for good.
Part of the problem is that it’s an accumulative toxin that, over time, can lead to significant health problems that are not immediately linked to fluoride over-exposure. In a 2005 paper entitled“Fluoride — A Modern Toxic Waste,” Lita Lee, Ph.D. writes:
Yiamouyiannis’ book, Fluoride, The Aging Factor, documents the cumulative effect of tissue damage by fluoride, commonly seen as aging (collagen damage), skin rashes and acne, gastrointestinal disorders, and many other conditions, including osteoporosis. The U.S. Center for Disease Control and the Safe Water Foundation reported that 30,000 to 50,000 excess deaths occur in the United States each year in areas in which the water contains only one ppm fluoride …
Fluoride suppresses the immune system: Fluoride inhibits the movement of white blood cells by 70 percent, thereby decreasing their ability to reach their target. Yiamouyiannis cites 15 references in his pamphlet, Lifesavers Guide to Fluoridation, that document immunosuppressive effects of as little as 10 percent of the amount of fluoride used in fluoridated water … Immunosuppressive effects run the gamut, from a cold that won’t go away to increased risk of cancer and other infectious diseases.
Studies have shown that fluoride toxicity can lead to a wide variety of health problems, including:
• Increased lead absorption
• Disrupts synthesis of collagen
• Hyperactivity and/or lethargy
• Muscle disorders
• Thyroid disease
• Arthritis
• Dementia
• Bone fractures
• Lowered thyroid function
• Bone cancer (osteosarcoma)
• Inactivates 62 enzymes and inhibits more than 100
• Inhibited formation of antibodies
• Genetic damage and cell death
• Increased tumor and cancer rate
• Disrupted immune system
• Damaged sperm and increased infertility
Suppressed Science: Fluoride Link to Cancer
Long-lost research linking fluoride to cancer has resurfaced in a Dutch film clip featuring Dr. Dean Burk, who in 1937 cofounded the U.S. National Cancer Institute (NCI) and headed its cytochemistry department for more than 30 years. In the taped interview, he equates water fluoridation to “public murder,” referring to a study that had been done on the 10 largest U.S. cities with fluoridation compared to the 10 largest without it. The study demonstrated that deaths from cancer abruptly rose in as little as a year or two after fluoridation began. This and other studies linking fluoride to cancer were government-ordered but were quickly buried once fluoride was found to be linked to dramatic increases in cancer.
Read More
share on Twitter Like Harvard Study Confirms Fluoride Reduces Children’s IQ on Facebook

GMO foods subject of bill in U.S. Senate

Apr 30, 2013 05:03 pm | admin

Ian Purdue scans non-GMO products at a Whole Foods Market in Austin, Texas. Photo: Ralph Barrera, McClatchy-Tribune News Service
Ian Purdue scans non-GMO products at a Whole Foods Market in Austin, Texas. Photo: Ralph Barrera, McClatchy-Tribune News Service
On the heels of last year’s defeat on the issue in California, Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., and Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., have introduced a bill to order the Food and Drug Administration to mandate the labeling of genetically engineered foods.
The legislation, which would require food manufacturers and stores to tag items made with genetically modified ingredients or grown from genetically engineered seeds, has support from both sides of the aisle, including more than 20 co-sponsors combined in the Senate and House of Representatives.
It has been hailed by food labeling advocates as a boon for consumers who have repeatedly tried to get such laws passed. California’s Proposition 37, a referendum on requiring genetically engineered food labeling last year, failed to pass. Boxer tried to pass a similar bill, without success, in 2000. But activists say that Boxer and DeFazio’s proposed legislation shows that demand for a genetically engineered labeling law has reached critical mass.
“This is big because for the first time in 13 years the U.S. Senate has recognized consumers’ right to know,” said Colin O’Neil, director of government affairs for the Center for Food Safety, of the federal proposal. “Labeling has become a nonpartisan issue. It’s no longer an issue of if, but when.”
Unlike Prop. 37, criticized for giving exemptions to products such as beef and most dairy, the federal bill would include all food items under the FDA’s purview. Foods such as beef and poultry, which are overseen by the Department of Agriculture, would also follow the labeling law, O’Neil said.
Prop. 37 lost, with 53.1 percent of voters casting a no vote. Proponents of the measure said they were blitzed by the food industry’s $46 million No on 37 campaign.
Those opponents argued that genetically engineered crops are safe and that the government would be stigmatizing those foods and standing in the way of science by requiring labeling.
But Boxer says the FDA requires labeling of more than 3,000 ingredients, additives and processes, and that now it is time for the agency to include foods that have been genetically modified.
“Americans have the right to know what is in the food they eat so they can make the best choices for their families,” Boxer wrote in a statement announcing the new bill. “This legislation is supported by a broad coalition of consumer groups, businesses, farmers, fishermen and parents who all agree that consumers deserve more – not less – information about the food they buy.”
According to the statement, “The FDA’s antiquated labeling policy has not kept pace with 21st century food technologies that allow for a wide array of genetic and molecular changes to food that can’t be detected by human senses.”
Boxer’s statement said surveys show that more than 90 percent of Americans support the labeling of genetically modified foods. Genetically engineered foods require labeling in 64 countries, including Russia and China.
“All over this country people are becoming more conscious about the foods they are eating and the foods they are serving to their kids,” said Sen. Bernie Sanders, independent-Vt., a co-sponsor of the bill. “I believe that when a mother goes to the store and buys food for her child, she has the right to know what she is feeding her child.”

Stacy Finz is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. E-mail: Twitter: @sfinz
Read more:
Read More
share on Twitter Like GMO foods subject of bill in U.S. Senate on Facebook

One Can of Sugar-laced Soda Per Day Increases Diabetes Risk by 22 Percent!

Apr 29, 2013 06:35 pm | admin

(NaturalNews) Drinking a can of sugar-laced soda a day will raise your risk of developing diabetes by 22 percent! According to a new study out today evidence suggests that just one 12-ounce serving of a sugar-sweetened beverage can significantly raise the risk of developing type 2 diabetes.
What’s interesting about this this is that since most of the research on the evil effects of soda has been done on people in the US, researches at the Imperial College of London set up to seek a link between soda consumption and type 2 diabetes in Europeans as well.
The British researchers used 15 years of data compiled from over 27,000 people from seven European countries. Over that 15-year period, more than 40 percent of those people developed type 2 diabetes and those who said they consumed at least one soda or similar sweet drink showed an 18 percent higher risk of developing the disease! When they took out factors such as weight and body mass index, the risk rose to 22 percent!
Coincidentally, these findings were right in line with the US studies showing a 25 percent percent increased risk of type 2 diabetes when consuming one soda per day. When the researchers looked at the diet soda drinkers in the group, they noticed something quite striking. When they factored in body weight and exercise, they healthy weight people in the group who drank diet soda were no more likely to develop type 2 diabetes than non-soda drinkers. This basically proves that you are at least 22 percent more likely to develop diabetes if you drink a can of soda each day. Scary stuff!

How can just one little soda do so much damage?

Sweetened drinks are the largest contributor to empty calories and processed sugar in both the American and European diets according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest. The sweeteners in these drinks along with artificial colors, flavors and phosphoric acid all have negative effects on the human body.

What about other sweet drinks like fruit juice?

Fruit juice consumption was not linked to diabetes incidence. In fact, natural drinks with sugars and flavors occurring naturally such as organic fruit juices have shown no evidence of increased risk of diabetes in otherwise healthy people. Patrick Wolfe, a statistics expert from University College London who was not involved in the research, said the message from its results was clear.
“The bottom line is that sugary soft drinks are not good for you – they have no nutritional value and there is evidence that drinking them every day can increase your relative risk for type 2 diabetes,” he said in an emailed comment.
Clearly the proven negative effects of soda should be enough to scare you into reconsidering taking a sip of the potentially lethal surgery poison drink.
Sources for this article include:
About the author:
Chris Sumbs is a natural health activist and enjoys writing about the natural lifestyle and healing benefits of holistic remedies. Visit his website for more great articles on these topics. You can also shop for thousands holistic remedies in the Underground Health Natural Health Store or visit the Underground Health Facebook Page.
Learn more:
Read More
share on Twitter Like One Can of Sugar-laced Soda Per Day Increases Diabetes Risk by 22 Percent! on Facebook


Google+ Followers