2 VIDEOS on the Global Warming Hoax

1. The Global Warming Hoax Used To Control And Tax The People Of The World

By Bernie Suarez, a revolutionary writer with a background in medicine, psychology, and information technology. He has written numerous articles over the years about freedom, government corruption and conspiracies, and solutions.

In this video he discusses the various complexities and agendas behind the global warming hoax movement and how it ties back to the new world order and global enslavement.

WATCH VIDEO HERE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJXl9XVlmQM&feature=youtu.be

2. Global Warming Is About Global Mass Genocide

By Luis Miranda, an award-winning journalist and the founder and editor-in-chief at The Real Agenda. His career spans over 18 years and almost every form of news media. His articles include subjects such as environmentalism, Agenda 21, climate change, geopolitics, globalisation, health, vaccines, food safety, corporate control of governments, immigration and banking cartels, among others.

The environmentalist movement was created to impose the policies desired by the British Empire, typified by WWF founder, Prince Philip. His desire to kill off billions of people via global scares such as global warming are supported by lies, created to promote a fascist genocidal policy… in the name of environmentalism.”

Followers of this movement may be well meaning, though mislead. The creators of this movement are Nazis… literally! See it for yourself and research this topic further.

WATCH VIDEO HERE: http://www.thesleuthjournal.com/global-warming-is-about-global-mass-genocide-video/

By James F. Tracy

Over the past several years a conspiracy of silence has surrounded the implementation of the Smart Grid across the United States and the world, perhaps with good reason. If the public was aware of what lay behind this agenda there would likely be considerable outcry and resistance.

“Smart meters”–the principal nodes of the Smart Grid network–are being installed on homes and businesses by power utilities across the United States under the legal and fiscal direction of the United States government. In December 2007 both houses of the US Congress passed and President George W. Bush signed into law the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA).

This 310-page piece of legislation employs the dubious science of anthropogenic CO2-based climate change science to mandate an array of policies, such as fuel efficiency standards for vehicles and “green” energy initiatives. Tucked away in the final pages of this law is the description and de facto mandate for national implementation of the Smart Grid that the Bush administration promised would result in “some of the largest CO2 emission cuts in our nation’s history.”[1]

The bill unambiguously lays out the design and intent behind the Smart Grid, including surveillance, tiered energy pricing, and energy rationing for all US households and businesses through round-the-clock monitoring of RFID-chipped “Energy Star” appliances.[2] Congress and “other stakeholders” (presumably for-profit utilities and an array of Smart Grid technology patent holders[3] whose lobbyists co-wrote the legislation) describe the Smart Grid’s characteristics and goals via ten provisions.

(1) Increased use of digital information and controls technology to improve reliability, security, and efficiency of the electric grid.
(2) Dynamic optimization of grid operations and resources with full cyber-security.
(3) Deployment[4] and integration of distributed resources and generation, including renewable resources.
(4) Development and incorporation of demand response, demand-side resources, and energy efficiency resources.
(5) Deployment of “smart” technologies (real-time, automated, interactive technologies that optimize the physical operation of appliances and consumer devices) for metering, communications concerning grid operations and status, and distribution automation.
(6) Integration of “smart” appliances and consumer devices.
(7) Deployment and integration of advanced electricity storage and peak-shaving technologies, including plug-in electric and hybrid electric vehicles, and thermal-storage air conditioning.
(8) Provision to consumers of timely information and control operations.
(9) Development of standards for communication and interoperability of appliances and equipment connected to the electric grid, including the infrastructure serving the grid.
(10) Identification and lowering of unreasonable or unnecessary barriers to adoption of smart grid technologies, practices, and services [emphases added].[5]

Less than two years after EISA’s enactment President Barack Obama directed $3.4 billion of the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act to Smart Grid development. Matching funds from the energy industry brought the total initial Smart Grid investment to $8 billion.[6] The overall completion of the Smart Grid will cost another $330 billion.[7] Today a majority of energy delivery throughout the US is routed to homes equipped with smart meters that monitor power consumption on a minute-to-minute basis.

As noted, the American public remains largely unaware of the numerous designs and monied interests behind the Smart Grid–not to mention how smart meters themselves pose substantial dangers to human health and privacy. This is because the plan for tiered energy pricing via wireless monitoring of household appliances has been almost entirely excluded from news media coverage since the EISA became law on December 19, 2007.

A LexisNexis search of US print news outlets for “Energy Independence and Security Act” and “Smart Grid” between the dates December 1, 2007 to January 31, 2008 yields virtually no results.

An identical LexisNexis search of such media for the dates December 1, 2007 to February 18, 2015 retrieves a total 11 print news items appearing in US dailies (seven in McClatchey Tribune papers; one article appearing in each of the following: New York Times 8/14/08, Santa Fe New Mexican, 5/12/09, Providence Journal, 2/24/11, Tampa Bay Times, 12/13/12).[8]

Even this scant reportage scarcely begins to examine the implications of the EISA’s Smart Grid plan. The New York Times chose to confine its coverage to a 364-word article, “The 8th Annual Year in Ideas; Smart Grids.” “It’s a response to what economists would call a tragedy of the commons,” the Times explains.

[P]eople use as much energy as they are willing to pay for, without giving any thought to how their use affects the overall amount of energy available … Enter Xcel’s $100 million initiative, called SmartGridCity, a set of technologies that give both energy providers and their customers more control over power consumption … Consumers, through a Web-enabled control panel in their homes, are able to regulate their energy consumption more closely — for example, setting their A.C. system to automatically reduce power use during peak hours.[9]

News in far more modest papers likewise resembles the promotional materials distributed by the utilities themselves. “There will soon be a time when homeowners can save electricity by having appliances automatically adjust power for peak-demand times and other periods of inactivity by a signal sent through the electrical outlet,” an article in Sunbury Pennsylvania’s Daily Item reads. “‘Right now, it’s at the infant stage,’” a power company executive observes. “‘We didn’t worry about this until two years ago. Nobody cared when electricity was five cents per kilowatt hour. People just bit the bullet and paid the bill.’”

Along these lines, the Department of Energy’s Assistant Secretary for the Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability Patricia Hoffman, is charged under the EISA with federal oversight of nationwide Smart Grid implementation. In other words, Hoffman is America’s “Smart Grid Czar.” Yet despite heading up such a dubious program since 2010, she has almost entirely escaped journalistic scrutiny, having been referenced or quoted in only four US daily papers (Washington Post, 2/8/12, St. Paul Pioneer Press, 4/26/12, Palm Beach Post, 5/12/13, Pittsburgh Tribune Review 11/13/13) since her tenure began.

In an era where news media wax rhapsodic over new technologies and fall over each other to report consumer-oriented “news you can use,” the Smart Grid’s pending debut should be a major story. It’s not. Indeed, almost the entire US population remains in the dark about this major technological development that will profoundly impact their lives.

When one more closely examines the implications and realities of the federally-approved Smart Grid scheme—from the adverse health effects of electromagnetic radiation to surveillance and energy rationing—there should be little wonder why this degree of silence surrounds its implementation. Such a technocratic system would never be freely accepted if subject to an open exchange and referendum.

http://memoryholeblog.com/2015/02/19/media-blackout-on-us-smart-grid-deployment/

By The Organic Consumers Association

Excerpts from the book Bringing the Food Economy Home.
International Society for Ecology and Culture  www.isec.org.uk

If one considers some typical modern foods- hamburgers laden with growth
hormones, vegetables laced with pesticides, soft drinks full of refined
sugar, and foods too numerous to mention whose colour and taste have been
artificially enhanced by manufactured chemicals- one could easily imagine
that the goal of the global food system is simply to provide the global
health care system with more customers. Local food systems, on the other
hand, are not only healthier for the environment, they provide people with
healthier food as well.

Chemical Stews

Local foods often contain no chemical additives, since they are
less likely to need processing. And because of the prevalence of small,
diversified, organic farms in local food systems, these foods are less apt
to contain residues of pesticides, herbicides, and other toxic
agrochemicals.

Although these chemicals now routinely turn up in our food and
water, they are very recent in human evolutionary history, and our defences
are therefore unprepared to protect us from them. They can cause cancer,
birth defects, immune system breakdown, and neurological damage, and can
interfere with normal childhood development. Some of these chemicals are
endocrine disrupters and have been implicated in the early onset of puberty
so prevalent in the industrial world. Studies have even indicated a
correlation between aggression and exposure to pesticides. The chemical
fertilizers used in industrial agriculture also pose a health problem:
nitrates in water, for example have been linked to blue-baby syndrome in
infants, birth defects, and cancer of the gastrointestinal tract.

The health of farmworkers is seriously compromised by their
exposure to agricultural chemicals on the job. According to a United Nations
study, from 20,000 to 40,000 farmworkers die each year from pesticide
exposure. Another study indicates that as many as 300,000 farmworkers in the
United States alone suffer from pesticide related illnesses. But one
doesn¹t need to be a farmworker or even live near a farm to be exposed to
these toxic compounds.

Tens of millions of Americans in hundreds of cities
and towns have been drinking tap water that is contaminated with low levels
of insecticides, weed killers and artificial fertilisers. They not only
drink it, they bathe and shower in it, thus inhaling small quantities of
farm chemicals and absorbing them through the skin.

A recent survey by the US Environmental Protection Agency found
that 80% of adults and 90% of children in the United States have measurable
concentrations of the pesticide chlorpyrifos in their urine.

Factory Farms and Human Health

Other agribusiness livestock practices are equally alarming.
Monsanto has been aggressively marketing rBGH, a recombinant form of a
naturally occurring hormone, for use in dairy cows. The use of the
genetically engineered hormone increases milk production by 15 percent or
more, but has numerous side effects: treated cows do not live as long; they
are prone to develop mastitis (an infection of the udder, usually treated
with antibiotics); and they often give birth to deformed or stillborn
calves. As far as human health is concerned, perhaps most worrisome of all
is that researchers have found elevated levels of another hormone, IGF-1, in
milk from cows treated with rBGH. IGF-1 has been linked to increased
likelihood of cancer in humans.

The only actual testing of the drug is currently being carried out as an
uncontrolled experiment on the American people, who are unknowingly
consuming the milk from the drugged cows. They are unknowing because the
drug¹s manufacturer has lobbied, litigated and intimidated, with near-total
success, to make labelling that would indicate whether or not milk comes
from rBGH-treated cows virtually illegal.

Read entire article: https://www.organicconsumers.org/old_articles/foodsafety/fastfood032103.php

By – It’s our future – Kiwis against TPPA

Trade Ministers from the 12 countries in the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) will sign the TPPA in Auckland on Thursday 4th February, according to statements by governments of Chile and Peru (although this has still not been confirmed by the secrecy-obsessed New Zealand government).
Today, the network of Kiwis against the TPPA, It’s Our Future, has launched a petition, together with partners, ActionStation and ShoutOut. The petition will gather the signatures of Kiwis who do not consent to the government signing the TPPA.

The petition is hosted by ActionStation: http://www.actionstation.org.nz/dontsign

By Katherine Paul – associate director of the Organic Consumers Association.

We’ve all grown accustomed to the steady parade of television ads—$3 billion year worth, by some estimates— urging us to “ask our doctors” about the latest miracle drug. Pharmaceutical ads have been commonplace since the 1990s, after the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) cleared the way for prescription drug companies to aggressively market their wares directly to consumers.

Wisdom and ethics aside, it’s easy to see why Big Pharma would push pills to humans, to treat human ailments. It’s big money.

But a drug company that makes animal drugs, purchased not by consumers but by factory farms, advertising direct to consumers who will never actually purchase those drugs? How does that make sense?

If you’re Elanco, the $2.3-billion animal drug division of Eli Lilly, you make it seem sensible by spinning the message. In Elanco’s case, the message is this: Without our animal drugs, the world will starve.

It’s a message that paints the drug maker as an altruistic savior, instead of the profit-motivated animal abuser and public health threat it actually is.

Massaging the Messaging

It’s been about a year since I accidentally stumbled on Elanco’s ENOUGH Movement campaign. Curious as to why a corporation that pushes animal drugs would spend millions on a consumer campaign, I “joined” the movement.

Since then, I’ve routinely received emails from “The Movement.” The subject lines generally go like this: “More People, Improved Diets, ENOUGH Food” or “When It Comes to Harvesting, Will We Have ENOUGH?” or, one of my favorites, “Pork: Can We Have ENOUGH?”

The messages are intended to evoke fear—fear of scarcity, fear of hunger. But these messages strike a different kind of fear in the hearts of those who know anything about the real causes of hunger—poverty,  poor distribution, waste, climate instability.

The fact is, we already produce enough food to feed the world. And as research conducted by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization has clearly shown, to achieve global food security we need a “rapid and significant shift from conventional monoculture-based and high external-input-dependent industrial production toward mosaics of sustainable regenerative production systems that also considerably improve the productivity of small-scale farmers.”

What we should really be afraid of is the fact that drug use on factory farms has led to a huge public health problem—antibiotic resistance. In the U.S., at least 2 million people are infected with antibiotic-resistant bacteria every year, and at least 23,000 die as a result, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Not to mention that animals pumped with drugs like ractopamine, banned in China, the European Union and more than 100 other countries—but not here in the U.S.—suffer and become ill. Yet we still turn them into meat for human consumption.

Good ENOUGH for U.S. Consumers

In October (2015), mainstream business press got wind of Elanco’s ENOUGH Movement. Bloomberg Businessweek’s Andrew Martin wrote a piece exposing the campaign, and its near-evangelical spokesperson, Jeff Simmons, president of Elanco. Martin wrote:

Simmons is on a counteroffensive. Increasingly, the drugs Elanco makes—including antibiotics and productivity enhancers—have come under attack by food activists and, in some instances, scientists and regulators. Food companies and fast-food chains are responding to consumer demand for healthier, more natural food that doesn’t contain some of the drugs that have made Elanco a $2.3 billion business.

Elanco, the animal-health division of the pharma giant Eli Lilly, makes one of the world’s most controversial growth-promoting chemicals for meat production: ractopamine, marketed as Optaflexx for cattle, Paylean for pigs, and Topmax for turkeys.

A member of the class of medicines known as beta-agonists, which are also given to asthmatic people to help relax their airway muscles, ractopamine makes animals rapidly put on lean weight—but it also mimics stress hormones and makes their hearts beat faster. Studies suggest that it makes livestock more vulnerable to heat. Ractopamine is banned in the European Union, China, and more than 100 other countries, and it faces mounting criticism here in the United States.

So controversial is ractopamine, that according to PoliticoPro, China recently agreed to resume imports of U.S. pork from six processing plants and eight cold storage facilities, only after those plants and facilities pledged to not to process hogs raised with ractopamine. PoliticoPro quoted a U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) official as saying:  “This will allow a greater share of U.S. pork and product exports to China in the coming months.”

What the official didn’t say? We’ll save the ractopamine-laced pork for consumers here in the U.S.

And what about those consumers who don’t want ractopamine, or any other unnecessary drugs, in their meat? Simmons told BloombergBusinessweek his message is this:

…that a minority of pushy elites—vegans, organic die-hards, and GMO-bashers—is keeping vital technology from farmers, that animal protein is a crucial source of nutrition, that unleashing innovation would allow farmers to produce enough meat, milk, and eggs to meet demand without draining additional natural resources.

To which we say, hogwash. And ENOUGH, already.

https://www.organicconsumers.org/blog/drugging-animals-factory-farms%E2%80%94enough-already

Here is a 6 part series full of information and suggestions to help you overcome and survive the imposed enslavement upon us all.

Part 1: Choose Love Not Fear                                              http://www.thesleuthjournal.com/the-way-to-overcome-the-conspiracy-part-1-choose-love-not-fear/

Part 2: Be Yourself – Unreservedly
http://www.thesleuthjournal.com/the-way-to-overcome-the-conspiracy-part-2-be-yourself-unreservedly/

Part 3: Govern Yourself
http://www.thesleuthjournal.com/the-way-to-overcome-the-conspiracy-part-3-govern-yourself/

Part 4: Choose Your Vibration
http://www.thesleuthjournal.com/the-way-to-overcome-the-conspiracy-part-4-choose-your-vibration/

Part 5: Create A New System Rather Than Resisting The Old One
http://www.thesleuthjournal.com/the-way-to-overcome-the-conspiracy-part-5-create-a-new-system-rather-than-resisting-the-old-one/

Part 6: Convert Fear Into Awareness                                     http://www.thesleuthjournal.com/the-way-to-overcome-the-conspiracy-part-6-convert-fear-into-awareness/

By Sophie McAdam

Whistleblowers, Ecocide, top secret trade deals, and shady ties between the Islamic State and the West’s closest allies…here are a few hot topics the mainstream media barely covered in 2015.

1. Any Tragedy That’s Not Western-Centric

The outpouring of fury, despair and grief by the corporate press over the November 13 Paris attacks highlighted the bias of the mainstream media towards Western victims of terrorism. There were two suicide bombings in Lebanon the day before the events in Paris, killing 37 and wounding 180, but they were not mentioned much in the sensationalist coverage of France’s tragedy, nor were they mentioned in the minutes’ silences and vigils conducted across the Western world in the aftermath.

From the horrors of the Congo’s bloody civil war to Erdogan’s persecution of Turkish Kurds, from Boko Haram’s ongoing reign of terror in Nigeria, Chad, and Cameroon to the plight of Sudanese refugees, the mainstream media seems to pick and choose which human lives deserve our empathy and which aren’t quite so important.

2. Indonesia Burning

As we previously reported, the Indonesian wildfires that caused devastation to the country’s people and wildlife last year were largely ignored by the mainstream media until several months after the devastating event began. The fires were started by loggers to clear the way for controversial palm oil plantations and caused health problems for over one million people. The World Bank estimates that the fires destroyed 2.6 million hectares (6.4m acres) of rainforest between June and October, costing $16.1bn and causing untold loss of life to the endangered animals who depend on the forests for their survival. Terrified orangutans fleeing the disaster were abused in a sickening way by some Indonesian villagers.

Ecocide on this scale should have been one of the biggest stories of 2015, but with the exception of Guardian columnist and environmental activist George Monbiot (who attacked his industry for censorship of the event), the tragedy was largely ignored to protect corporate interests.

3. France’s Slip Into Martial Law

The terrorist attacks in Paris were used as justification by the French, British and German governments to join military strikes in Syria. They were also used as justification by the French government to severely restrict freedoms at home. As we reported, immediately after the terrible events of November 13, the French government began closing down alternative news sites. The President also declared that anyone’s house could be searched without a warrant, websites could be blocked without warning, and citizens could be put under house arrest without a trial. Activists hoping to march in Paris at last month’s Climate Conference were disappointed to learn that France’s state of emergency also included a ban on protests. Some French politicians are pushing to install GPS trackers in rental cars, re-write the Constitution to allow for martial law, block free wifi and Tor, and combine state databases, which would give the state access to citizens’ personal medical records.

Amnesty International, along with many French bloggers, expressed concern that the Government had imposed martial law in response to the terrorist attack. They have a point: Isn’t a restriction of freedoms at home exactly what extremists would want? John Dalhuisen, Amnesty International’s Director of Europe and Central Asia, said in November: “It is a paradox to suspend human rights in order to defend them.”

Many bloggers agreed and said they were scared about the situation in France. One wrote:

I’m currently living in Paris, the city where some fanatics killed people because they were listening to music, watching a football match, or simply enjoy beers in a bar. I was living in the neighbourhood of where those tragic event happened. Now I’m scared.
I’m not scared of terrorists.
I’m scared of my own country.
I’m scared because different is now starting to mean dangerous.

The anonymous man goes on:

It seems that being an ecologist is enough to get house arrest. Before its 20th November reform, this sentence was reserved to people ‘whose activity is dangerous’, now it’s ‘serious reason to believe that his behaviour constitutes a threat’. We’re almost at the thought crime.

France’s emergency measures were reported by the mainstream media, but there was little analysis or debate about whether they are justified: the myth we have to trade in our freedoms to get security has become a normal part of everyday life.

4. The Truth About ISIS

In 2015, True Activist reported on a growing body of evidence that strongly suggests the Islamic State:

• Would not exist at all if it weren’t for the Pentagon’s terrible handling of the illegal 2003 Iraq invasion
• Is funded and armed by Western allies Turkey and Saudi Arabia
• Continues to grow due to oil sales to Turkey
• May have ties to the British government and Israel
• Could be part of a bigger geo-political plan by the USA and Britain to destabilize the region, using the corporate press to lie to the public in order to gain popular support for more endless oil wars.

The mainstream media continues to peddle the tired old narrative that the Western coalition are in Syria specifically to fight the I.S. If this were true, it would be logical for these countries to support Russia in its war against the terrorist organization. Yet coverage of Vladimir Putin in the corporate press continues to be entirely negative, despite the fact Russia single-handedly took out 40% of the Islamic State’s infrastructure in just one week. The revelations above have been completely censored by the corporate press, which is becoming less credible by the day.

Our brave new world starts with these brave new cities.

So-called smart cities aren’t just some far off futuristic abstract twinkle in the New World Order’s eye…these are being built right now.

Think privacy and freedom are limited commodities now? Try having either of those things living in a smart city control grid where everything you do is tracked, traced, chipped and monitored 24 hours a day.

Masdar City: ‘City of the Future’

Currently being built in Abu Dhabi at a price tag of $22 billion, Masdar (which means “the source”) is a six-kilometer walled smart city shaped like two squares that resemble The Borg’s Unicomplex from the sci-fi TV show Star Trek. Set for a target population of 50,000 people, the city promises to be carbon emission-free with 100% renewable energy. Traditional cars are completely out; while walking, biking and mass transit are encouraged. Futuristic driverless ‘personal rapid transit’ (PRT) pod cars are being considered, but are apparently quite costly. The tiny cars look like a smaller version of the little electronic cars featured in the 1980s film Total Recall.

Read entire article and watch the video: http://truthstreammedia.com/2013/08/24/orwells-dystopic-nightmare-comes-true-agenda-21-smart-cities-are-here/

By Ariana Marisol

The use of hemp has the potential to have an extremely positive impact on many industries in the United States. The federal government, for many years, has made it impossible to utilize this widely diverse crop, even though it is entirely different from marijuana. North Carolina has recently legalized the cultivation and manufacturing of industrial hemp. This proves to be a huge win and game-changer for the future and legalization of industrial hemp in our nation.

One of the only hemp decortication plants in the United States resides in Spring Hope, North Carolina. This plant has been inactive for many years due to legal issues, but with the passing of a recent law legalizing hemp for industrialization, the plant will begin to process 40 million pounds of hemp each year. This will pave the way for many employment opportunities and the opportunity to set an example of the various benefits industrial hemp can provide our states and our nation as a whole. Decortication is the process of stripping back plant material from stalks, allowing the crop to be used for production. This will allow hemp to be turned into clothing, rope, fuel, jewelry, and much more.

On October 31st, 2015, Governor Pat McCrory passed Senate Bill 313. This bill allows farmers in North Carolina the opportunity to grow, process, and use hemp. This bill was passed by the House and Senate by a vote of 101-7 and 42-2 in September. This is a huge success in the state of North Carolina, and will provide many people with new jobs.

The United States is the number one importer of hemp products in the world because it has been illegal to grow within our own boarders. This means the United States has spent millions of dollars on importing a crop we could easily be growing on our own soil. The legalization of hemp will prove to be a valuable move with many economic and environmental benefits. Hemp can grow well in many parts of the United States and provide for a new local economy that will help both farmers and clients alike.

Hemp has many diverse uses: Rope, Paper, Clothing, Plastics, Building material, Cooking oil, Food, Medicine, Clean fuel, Weed control, Water and soil purification, Skin care products, Animal and bird feed.

The passing of Bill 313 can pave the way for the re-introduction of hemp as an industrial material that will have huge benefits for our economy.

http://www.naturalblaze.com/2016/01/40-million-pounds-of-hemp-will-be-produced-in-north-carolina.html

By Isaac Davis

“If you want to continue to be slaves of the banks and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money and control credit.” – Josiah Stamp

Iceland has gained the admiration of populists in recent years by doing that which no other nation in the world seems to be willing or capable of doing: prosecuting criminal bankers for engineering financial collapse for profit.

Their effective revolt against the banking class, who drove the tiny nation into economic crisis in 2008, is the brightest example yet that the world does not have to be indebted in perpetuity to an austere and criminal wealthy elite. In 2015, 26 Icelandic bankers were sentenced to prison and the government ordered a bank sale to benefit the citizenry.

Inspired by Iceland’s progress, activists in Switzerland are now making an important stand against the banking cartels and have successfully petitioned to bring an initiative to public referendum that would attack the private banks where it matters most: their power to lend money they don’t actually have, and to create money out of thin air.

Switzerland will hold a referendum to decide whether to ban commercial banks from creating money.

The Swiss federal government confirmed on Thursday that it would hold a plebiscite, after more than 110,000 people signed a petition calling for the central bank to be given sole power to create money in the financial system.

The campaign – led by the Swiss Sovereign Money movement and known as the Vollgeld initiative – is designed to limit financial speculation by requiring private banks to hold 100pc reserves against their deposits.  [The Telegraph]

Switzerland is in a key position to play a revolutionary role in changing how global banking functions. In addition to being the world’s safest harbor for storing wealth, it is also home to the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), a shadowy private company owned by many of the world’s central banks, and acting as a lender to the central banks. The BIS is the very heart of global reserve banking, the policy that enables banks to lend money that does not actually exist in their bank deposits, but is instead literally created electronically from nothing whenever a bank extends a line of credit.

Reserve banking is the policy that guarantees insurmountable debt as the outcome of all financial transactions.

The Sovereign Money initiative in Switzerland aims to curb financial speculation, which is the intended and inevitable result of reserve banking, the tool that makes financial adventurism possible by supplying the banks with endless quantities of fiat money.

Limiting a bank’s ability to produce money from nothing would be a direct blow to the roots of the banking cartel, and would cripple their ability to manipulate the world economy. Here’s how it works, in rather simplified terms:

…if we had access to the same computer terminals the banks have, we could magic in or out of existence all the imaginary stuff we are trained to think of as important – money – in whatever quantities we liked.

This is how it works: when they print quite a lot of this stuff there is a boom. When they print too much of it, there is inflation (actually, the printing of money is inflation). When they stop printing it or simply hold on to it, there is a depression.

In Switzerland, 90% of all money in circulation is electronic, and for this, The National Bank of Switzerland has become the direct target of the Sovereign Money Campaign. Swiss law has in the past required required banks to back all currency creation with collateral assets like physical silver or gold, however in recent decades the climate has changed, and, “due to the emergence of electronic payment transactions, banks have regained the opportunity to create their own money.”

The grassroots campaign said in a public statement regarding the intentions of the referendum, “banks won’t be able to create money for themselves any more, they’ll only be able to lend money that they have from savers or other banks.”

This is an interesting twist in the human saga of man vs. banks, and while it remains to be seen if the referendum passes or not, it must be pointed out that it does have its own problems, articulated by Sam Gerrans:

… it does say that the central bank should be given sole right to create money. This would essentially leave the creation of money in the same hands as those who control the Federal Reserve or the Bank of England rather than allow them to farm out the process. But at least it shows that people are beginning to wake up to where the true power lies.

In the unlikely event that this grass-roots movement in Switzerland should get its way and its proposed legislation be enacted, and then begin to morph into something which really does threaten the banking elite, we must not be surprised if Switzerland is shortly discovered to be harboring weapons of mass destruction, or to have masterminded 9/11, or to be financing Islamic State.

Part of the cultural conditioning of our time is an ingrained, presumed dependency on sacred cow institutions like banking. Just like it is impossible for most Americans to envision a world without Democrats and Republicans, it is difficult for most people to imagine a world without predatory global banking.

Yet, there are a number of other possibilities for trading, storing wealth, and facilitating development in the world. This is not the only economic system we can imagine, and as Iceland has proven, people can regain control of their collective wealth, so perhaps this revolution will foment further in Switzerland, presenting a chance to at least bring greater awareness to the truth about central banking.

http://www.activistpost.com/2015/12/switzerland-follows-iceland-in-declaring-war-against-the-banksters.html

By Tony Geren

37% of Bill Gates’ net worth would end world hunger. Instead, he invests billions of dollars into corporations blamed for many of the same health issues the Gates Foundation seeks to cure.

The Los Angeles Times revealed back in 2007 that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has made millions of dollars each year from companies blamed for many of the same social and health problems the Foundation seeks to address.

The LA Times investigation revealed the Gates Foundation’s humanitarian concerns are not reflected in how it invests its money. In the Niger Delta — where the Foundation funds programs to fight polio and measles – the Foundation has also invested more than $400 million dollars in companies including Royal Dutch Shell, Exxon Mobil Corp, and Chevron. These oil firms have been responsible for much of the pollution many blame for respiratory problems and other afflictions among the local population.

The Gates Foundation also has investments in sixty-nine of the worst polluting companies in the US and Canada, including Dow Chemical. It holds stakes in pharmaceutical companies whose drugs cost far beyond what most AIDS patients around the world can afford. Other companies in the Foundation’s portfolio have been accused of transgressions including forcing thousands of people to lose their homes; supporting child labor; and defrauding and neglecting patients in need of medical care.

With an endowment larger than all but four of the world’s largest hedge funds, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is easily one of the most powerful charities in the world. According to its website, the organization “works to help all people lead healthy, productive lives.” So how do the investments of the foundation’s $36 billion investing arm, the Gates Foundation Trust, match up to its mission? We dug into the group’s recently released 2012 tax returns to find out.

The Gates Foundation did not respond to Mother Jones’ requests for comment; however, its investment policy says the the trust’s managers “consider other issues beyond corporate profits, including the values that drive the foundation’s work.”

In its most recent annual report to investors, private prison company GEO group listed some risks to its bottom line, including “reductions in crime rates” that “could lead to reductions in arrests, convictions and sentences,” along with immigration reform and the decriminalization of drugs. One year after Mother Jones reported the foundations investment in this company, the philanthropy’s trust will not say if one of its most controversial holdings is still on its books. Military contractor DynCorp ($2.5 million donated by the foundation), meanwhile, has faced allegations of fraud, mismanagement, and even slavery from the Middle East to Eastern Europe. For Bill Gates to fund  corporations such as Dyncorp, a military contractor, which financed the entire Iraq war, while 37% of his net worth could end world hunger, is not noble, and its ridiculous to consider it charity.

(SEE MORE): Gates Foundation Financials

Polio vaccinations by the Gates Foundation cause thousands of cases of AFP in India

A large portion of the world’s vaccines are given to the Third World as “charity,” when the underlying conditions of economic impoverishment, poor nutrition, chemical exposures, and political unrest are never addressed. Helping the effort against polio is a noble and inspiring thing to do. In India, Bill Gates’ funded polio vaccine is said to have wiped out the disease, which is considered to be a landmark achievement. But the country now has the world’s highest rate of non-polio AFP (acute flaccid paralysis) cases, which is linked entirely to his vaccinations. AFP is a condition in which a patient suffers from paralysis that results in floppy limbs due to reduced muscle tone. While AFP is symptomatic of polio, it can be caused by other diseases such as the Guillain Barre Syndrome and nerve lesions as well—the primary cause fuelling the argument that India is not really free of wild polio virus.

There is a dirty secret in the vaccine business that is very well documented: the live oral polio vaccine can actually spread polio and causes AFP. This is very well-known throughout the world, but in the U.S. mainstream media, this information is seldom, if ever, published. As usual, we need to research further past the mainstream media outlets to find out what is happening with vaccines around the world.

Data from India on polio control over 10 years, available from the National Polio Surveillance Project, has now been compiled and made available online for anyone to see.This shows that the non-polio AFP rate increases in proportion to the number of polio vaccine doses received in each area. Nationally, the non-polio AFP rate is now 12 times higher than expected. In the states of Uttar Pradesh (UP) and Bihar, which have pulse polio rounds nearly every month, the non-polio AFP rate is 25- and 35-fold higher than the international norms.

LiveMint in India reported on the polio-free myth in India, explaining how the live polio vaccine was responsible for increases in paralysis. LiveMint is the second largest business newspaper in India and has an exclusive relationship with the Wall Street Journal. So this report was from the “mainstream” media in India.

(Vidya Krishnan reported the story: India to get polio-free status amid rise in acute flaccid paralysis cases)

What is clear from this report, and well documented in peer-reviewed literature, is that the term “polio-free status” is completely meaningless. The designation of a country as “polio-free” is simply a triumphant marketing cry  to continue promoting polio vaccines, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that oral polio vaccines do far more harm than good.

The oral polio vaccine is banned in the United States and many other countries. The truth is that the reality is not pretty as we’d like to believe. Bill Gates, and his very charitable organization, is part of the problem, while funding exactly what is wrong with the world. From dangerous vaccinations, to funding war, to Bill Gates buying 500,000 shares of geo-engineering corporation, Monsanto. Time to expose him just like everyone else perpetuating the failures of our system. Because no matter how humanitarian they can appear to be, the money always tells a different story.

http://www.naturalblaze.com/2016/01/bill-gates-could-end-world-hunger-instead-gives-36-billion-to-corporate-america.html

By Mellisa Dykes

Just ahead of this year’s Bilderberg confab, where some of the world’s most powerful people met in secret to discuss life-altering topics such as whether or not privacy still exists, the Pew Research Center released a report that detailed how the world would be irrevocably changed by the “Internet of Things” by 2025.

To start, Pew describes the Internet of Things as a “global, immersive, invisible, ambient networked computing environment built through the continued proliferation of smart sensors, cameras, software, databases, and massive data centers in a world-spanning information fabric.”

In short, everything (devices, vehicles, appliances, smart wearables, and other sensor-equipped nouns) will be connected to everything else, and all of it will be continuously spitting out data that will be continuously fed back and forth and analyzed.

The report Pew released covered a survey on expert opinions regarding the expansion of the Internet of Things by 2025.

The Internet of Things…sigh. Not to get into Bilderberg here (that’s a whole different topic altogether), but if Bilderberg is asking whether or not privacy exists at their annual conference this year, it’s obviously because they already know the answer.

According to Pew, this Internet of Things is going to be pervasive throughout your community, your home and even on (or within) your own body.

Some of the downsides Pew discussed include the fact that it won’t just be our privacy as a whole that’s in danger here, but literally “people’s abilities to control their own lives.” Because every day activities will be chipped/sensored, tracked and traced with continuous data generated, “the level of profiling and targeting will grow and amplify social, economic, and political struggles.”

In addition to this fundamentally changing the way we relate to one another and the world, if you don’t like it and you try to opt out, you could wind up disenfranchised and according to university librarian K. G. Schneider, those left behind during this so-called digital divide will become invisible outcasts on the fringe of society who could be “increasingly seen as less than full humans.”

On top of everything else, the smart grid will apparently be so smart that, “We will live in a world where many things won’t work and nobody will know how to fix them.”

Gee. Great.

I guess I’ll be one of those “less than full humans” who can look forward to being disenfranchised by the Internet of Things in the future, because from everything I’ve read about it, I’d rather pull a Swiss Family Robinson and live in a damn tree than become part of what sounds like a pretty oppressive system.

A cage with invisible, digital bars? Imagine a world where literally everything you do is spitting out bits of data on yourself and your life…continuously. Many people think we’re already there now, and we are in some ways, but what’s going on with big data today is nothing compared to what the future holds.

Do I want everyone from the government to mega-corporations to know what I threw away in my trash five minutes ago? Everything from how much hot water I used to take my morning shower or what temperature I like to keep my home on a hot summer afternoon to what my political beliefs are? Frank Pasquale, a law professor at the University of Maryland, told Pew, “There will be a small class of ‘watchers’ and a much larger class of the experimented upon, the watched.” The NSA has already adopted that Police diddy, “Every Breath You Take” as their agency theme song at this point: every single day…And every word you say…

But scale it down a bit further. Do I really want my refrigerator to “talk” to its own contents and have the power and ability to buy milk for me when I run out? One Pew respondent wrote, “If my bathroom scale tells my smartphone how much I weigh, that is handy but hardly life-changing.” Hardly? I beg to differ. Do I really want to have spoken conversations with my “smart” appliances? Reminds me of the medicine cabinets in THX1138 that remind citizens in that dystopic future nightmare to take their state-sanctioned sedation pills.

Recently I saw an ad for the new WI-FI talking thermostat — the one where the guy starts out by saying he’s going to let us all in a secret, which is that voice control is the future. Instead of having to get up off your butt and punch a button if the temperature in your house isn’t at a very comfortable level, you can just announce to your smart thermostat when you are too hot or cold and it is supposed to adjust the temperature in your home accordingly.

The first thought that popped into my head was the thermometer responding in the voice of Hal from Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey with, “I’m sorry, Dave. I don’t think I can turn down your thermostat today. You’ve used all your energy credits this month and your region is at peak usage times…”

But let’s scale it down even further. The trendy new iWatches or whatever the new smart wearables will be called will be able to continuously monitor things like your heart beat, blood pressure, oxygen rates, how much water you’ve drank, your nutrition levels… In short, when you eat too much ice cream or forget to exercise, data will. Be. Generated.

Do I really want computers to know everything about me?

Talk about losing control of your life. That’s just the beginning.

Your behavior is going to be directed by the smart grid. Trendy, technocratic social engineering will dictate your existence at every turn. Sounds…super fun.

The implications are endless. Privacy won’t just be forgotten. It simply will not exist, period. People are already forgetting  what it truly is now. Two-year-olds are using iPads as if we never lived in a time where a toddler didn’t have a computer. A few more generations, and our children’s dictionaries might as well not even have the word ‘privacy’ in them anymore (and, by extension America, what will the 4th Amendment look like then?)

Not all technology is a bad thing (obviously). I’m just over the puppet master technocrats running things. (Smashing job so far, by the way). I can see where this is going, and it’s not anywhere I’d like to be.

I’m not my data. I’m still a human being. I don’t want or need my computer (and by extension, anyone with access to it) to know me better than I know myself. I don’t want to be ruled by algorithms. I want to have some control over my own destiny, thank you.

Unfortunately, we’re all willingly funding and participating in our own digital enslavement to some extent. So what’s your breaking point?

College professor Peter R. Jacoby, who likened all this trendy new smart tech to the bread and circuses of the Roman Empire, wrote, “By 2025, we will have long ago given up our privacy. The Internet of Things will demand — and we will give willingly — our souls.”

http://www.thedailysheeple.com/the-internet-of-things-2025-your-life-directed-by-the-smart-grid_062014

By Melissa Dykes

Why exactly is it that everyone seems not just okay, but downright gleeful at the thought of computers controlling virtually every aspect of our lives? Why are we running around paying to spy on ourselves?

After decades of being warned about the dangers of this exact situation in books and movies, people are willingly lining up to buy into their own Orwellian technological enslavement without any real justification other than what, trendiness?

The potential few dollars that might be saved here won’t be worth anything once the disaggregation algorithms and big data-based peak pricing models are in full swing…

Check out this creepy ad for a similar smart talking thermostat here. It’s cringe-worthy to say the least.

The first thought that popped into our heads when we saw this was the thermometer responding in the voice of Hal from Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey:

I’m sorry, Dave. I don’t think I can turn down your thermostat today. You’ve used all your energy credits this month and your region is at peak usage times…

 

http://www.activistpost.com/2015/12/why-would-you-willingly-put-hal9000-in-your-home.html

All of the latest impartial research proves that conventional medicine methods of curing cancer, provided by corporate pharmaceuticals, are not effective. These same corporations have been exposed as guilty of suppressing effective natural cures. In an attempt to respond to the number of inquiries we have had for natural cancer cures we have compiled this list of links to alternative methods.

Cancer Step Outside the Box – Video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9v4cRB462WI&list=PL948E96655D8952CE

Cancer – The Forbidden Cures https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWLrfNJICeM&list=PL948E96655D8952CE&index=1

Every Cancer Can be Cured in Weeks explains Dr Leonard Coldwell https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI3LwNur50Q

Simple Cancer Cure w/Baking Soda by Dr. Simoncini Oncologist Discovers – Sodium Bicarbonate https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hq-pkSH2YaQ

Lemon Kills Cancer Cells http://www.cancercompass.com/message-board/message/all,55424,0.htm

Lemons and Cancer http://www.hope4cancer.com/information/lemons-and-cancer.html

Dr. Jimenez, World-Leading Pioneer In Natural Cancer Treatments http://www.hope4cancer.com/

Cancer Treatments You Have Never Heard About Could Save Your Life! http://www.cancertutor.com/
Inexpensive (Yet Potent) Cancer Treatments http://www.cancertutor.com/faq_inexpensive/

Natural News
http://www.naturalnews.com

Also check out these other links on RUSH:

• Natural ginger is up to 10,000 times more effective than chemotherapy drugs at treating cancer
• Grape seed extract more effective than chemotherapy in advanced cancer
• Cancer Cure Links
• Cure Cancer
• Lemon cancer cure
• The anti-cancer medicine in broccoli (DIM nutrients) isn’t released until you chew them to combine two phytochemicals
• Cesium Carbonate & Cesium Chloride Kills Cancer Cells
• More research verifies powerful anti-cancer properties of turmeric
• Three tonics you need to detoxify from chemotherapy – also good for any other detox
• Foods, herbs, and supplements that kill cancer – safer and more effective than drugs

By Catherine Frompovich

What do cell phones, cell towers, Wi-Fi, Smart Meters and other “smart” devices all have in common?

They emit radiation, which no one wants to take seriously as having adverse health effects on humans. Medically, the adverse effects are called “Non-thermal health effects.”

In 2013, a ninth grade experiment for a national science fair found remarkable proof of radiation damage from Wi-Fi routers that was replicated by a peer review study. Wow! So, what did both experiments show? Garden cress seeds placed near Wi-Fi routers failed to germinate.

Five Danish schoolgirls proved what apparently no one in the microwave industry wanted to. Wi-Fi radiation causes adverse effects to any life forms, which, in their experiment, were garden cress seeds. The young ladies placed the seeds near two Wi-Fi routers, waited and took photographs for twelve days. The results—failure of seeds to germinate—can be seen in the above photographs.

So, what does that experiment portend for humans? That similar effect(s) can occur from cell towers too. Two researchers, “Drs. Cammaerts and Johansson conducted a partial replication of the original Danish student study using cell towers instead of WiFi routers as the source of wireless radiation. They found that cress seeds located 200 meters from two cell towers failed to germinate.” [1] What did they conclude from their findings? “Wireless technology may effectively and seriously impact nature and should urgently be used much more cautiously.”

That wireless technology may effectively and seriously impact nature and should be used much more cautiously challenges why Wi-Fi routers are standard technology in USA schools; why Smart Meters for electric, natural gas, and water utility companies are mandated and retrofitted on to every dwelling; and why cell towers [2], especially “stingrays” [3], litter the landscape like mushrooms after a spring rain, while radiation-emitting computers and smart phones are like appendages dangling from almost everyone’s personage. All those technologies emit electromagnetic frequencies in various ranges with adverse consequences for the environment, plant life (as we’ve seen with the cress seeds), animals and humans.

Here are some studies that corroborate my last statement:

Man-made electromagnetic waves have actually largely been shown to have adverse effects on living organisms. They affect, for instance,

• mammals (Adang et al., 2006; Benlaidi & Kharroussi, 2011),
• birds (Everaert & Bauwens, 2007),
• amphibians (Balmori, 2006),
• bees (Kimmel et al., 2007, Sharma & Kumar, 2010; Favre, 2011),
• ants (Cammaerts et al., 2012, 2013),
• fruit flies (Panagopoulos et al., 2004; Panagopoulos, 2012), and even
• protozoa (Cammaerts et al., 2011).
• In fact, they act firstly and essentially on the cellular membrane and so affect any living organism (Cammaerts et al., 2011). Such waves have also been shown to impact plants (Roux et al., 2008; Haggerty, 2010), at physiological and ecological levels. [1] [CJF emphasis added}

Any microwave technology device that transmits and receives information, signals, data, or voice messages emits EMFs / RFs known as non-ionizing radiation that produce Non-thermal adverse health effects recognized by the American Academy of Environmental Medicine here and which vested microwave technology interests pooh-pooh. They claim the only adverse health problem can be heated skin, and none of their devices cause that. However, that ‘science’ is based on early radar tests done in the 1950s and 1960s; it’s now 2016.

Now, I have a bridge on the moon I’d like to sell. Who wants to buy it? No one, I’m certain, believes that’s a factual statement. Then, why oh why, do consumers believe microwave technologies are not harmful? I remember when cigarettes were smoked by doctors, and Camels was their favorite brand.

When will consumers get out from under the notion that if it’s on the market, there’s nothing wrong with it, it’s been tested accurately for safety, and we must have every updated version of the product?

http://www.activistpost.com/2016/01/cell-tower-radiation-prevents-garden-cress-seed-germination-in-danish-experiment.html?