A lesson in love, cooperation, fear, trust, ingenuity, inventiveness, resolve and determination. What you may ask?? I just watched my next door neighbors’ three young children come home from school and discover they are locked out of the house. (Now how come not one of them had a key, is another story, lol) They appear to be 12 (girl), 10 (boy) and about 6(boy) years of age. 
Watching the elder brother take the lead and open the basement window to climb in, only to find out, that while he may have been the one to open the window, he was not small enough to get through it. He must have attempted doing it several times, from going head first to feet first. 

The others coached, laughed and watched his every attempt to get through the window but he simply could not figure out how to get his backsides through it.

Then sister takes the lead, she seems completely animated the entire time, giving instructions, fussing, and basically being a female in a stressful situation where she has to get the men to follow her idea. Her idea, “let little man go through,” he can fit. 

Finally, big brother, after several failed attempts, IN A HUFF, goes along with the idea, snatches little man’s glasses off and tells him to do it. Little man is clearly terrified of the idea. What if I fall? What if I break something? Who is gonna catch me?? 

Big brother says, never mind and attempts to do it again with no luck. It is a tight squeeze and his hindparts just won’t make it, no matter how much he twists and turns. Then big sister stands behind big brother and measures her own hindparts. Hmmmmm. Maybe a bit smaller. She tries, it quite a few times, and while it may be a bit smaller??? she is not the same shape as her brother, long torso, just can’t seem to maneuver that torso through that tiny window opening. All the while they take turns running around to the other side of the building. Must be a bigger window around there to climb through.

Again and again, they negotiate and strategize and maneuver and attempt to figure out how can they get into the house.

Finally at long last, little man gets up the courage. It seemed to never occur to them to hold him as he goes through the tiny window opening. Something so obvious did not appear obvious to them at all. 

Little man, took off his glasses for the 4th time, tried going in head first, then feet first. It seemed his nervousness was dissipating as he pushed himself in little by little. After watching this for a few seconds, big brother has a great idea, maybe I’ll help him! He rushes over and holds little man by the head!! Wow, I wondered to my self, why didn’t they just hold his hands and reassure him that he wouldn’t get hurt??

In an instant, little man is in the house. He runs to the front door in another instant and opens the door. He lets his big brother and sister in to cheers and yells, little man, is the hero of the day!!!! 

I remember as a child and even an adult being locked out of the house. I remember pushing my own tiny son through the opening of a window. I remember my children telling me how they climbed onto the roof and got themselves in. But this is the absolute first time I saw little people do it on their own. I basically would have been of no service to them, they don’t know me, I am new to the neighborhood and most certainly they were taught not to speak to strangers.

It was an absolute pleasure to watch them work it out, and then wonder, how come we big bad adults can’t do the same? What is wrong with us that, if we have a common goal, we cannot negotiate in a way that everyone is helped and no one is hurt. Why can’t we take the risk of trying something new, it may be a little scary, but if the new plan works, try it.

Then I thought to myself, I hope and pray they grow up to be the same kind of adults I saw them as children. And then I hope they grow up and work in a important position at the UN, and maybe they could bring some of their talents and help this world be a better place, because seriously, ADULTS ARE NOT MAKING IT HAPPEN!

Update: The next day the young people arrive home again, to a locked door. Little man goes straight for the window. But alas, there was no need, they had the key to get in!

Toumani Diabaté

It always helps to get back on track from the crazyness that makes up this world. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S00CRpdmO_A&list=RD029V4V6Lwbz-0

The United States is in no position to take leadership in response to any use of such weaponry by SyriaBy Stephen Zunes, May 2, 2013

• If, as alleged, the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons, it would indeed be a serious development, constituting a breach of the Geneva Protocol of 1925, one of the world’s most important disarmament treaties, which banned the use of chemical weapons.

• In 1993, the international community came together to ratify the Chemical Weapons Convention, a binding international treaty that would also prohibit the development, production, acquisition, stockpiling, retention, and transfer or use of chemical weapons. Syria is one of only eight of the world’s 193 countries not party to the convention.

• However, U.S. policy regarding chemical weapons has been so inconsistent and politicized that the United States is in no position to take leadership in response to any use of such weaponry by Syria.

• The controversy over Syria’s chemical weapons stockpiles is not new. Both the Bush administration and Congress, in the 2003 Syria Accountability Act, raised the issue of Syria’s chemical weapons stockpiles, specifically Syria’s refusal to ratify the Chemical Weapons Convention. The failure of Syria to end its chemical weapons program was deemed sufficient grounds by a large bipartisan majority of Congress to impose strict sanctions on that country. Syria rejected such calls for unilateral disarmament on the grounds that it was not the only country in the region that had failed to sign the CWC—nor was it the first country in the region to develop chemical weapons, nor did it have the largest chemical weapons arsenal in the region.

• Indeed, neither Israel nor Egypt, the world’s two largest recipients of U.S. military aid, is a party to the convention either. Never has Congress or any administration of either party called on Israel or Egypt to disarm their chemical weapons arsenals, much less threatened sanctions for having failed to do so. U.S. policy, therefore, appears to be that while it is legitimate for its allies Israel and Egypt to refuse to ratify this important arms control convention, Syria needed to be singled out for punishment for its refusal.

• The first country in the Middle East to obtain and use chemical weapons was Egypt, which used phosgene and mustard gas in the mid-1960s during its intervention in Yemen’s civil war. There is no indication Egypt has ever destroyed any of its chemical agents or weapons. The U.S.-backed Mubarak regime continued its chemical weapons research and development program until its ouster in a popular uprising two years ago, and the program is believed to have continued subsequently.

• Israel is widely believed to have produced and stockpiled an extensive range of chemical weapons and is engaged in ongoing research and development of additional chemical weaponry. (Israel is also believed to maintain a sophisticated biological weapons program, which is widely thought to include anthrax and more advanced weaponized agents and other toxins, as well as a sizable nuclear weapons arsenal with sophisticated delivery systems.) For more than 45 years, the Syrians have witnessed successive U.S. administration provide massive amounts of armaments to a neighboring country with a vastly superior military capability which has invaded, occupied, and colonized Syria’s Golan province in the southwest. In 2007, the United States successfully pressured Israel to reject peace overtures from the Syrian government in which the Syrians offered to recognize Israel and agree to strict security guarantees in return for a complete Israeli withdrawal from occupied Syrian territory.

• The U.S. position that Syria must unilaterally give up its chemical weapons and missiles while allowing a powerful and hostile neighbor to maintain and expand its sizable arsenal of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons is simply unreasonable. No country, whether autocratic or democratic, could be expected to accept such conditions.

• This is part of a longstanding pattern of hostility by the United States towards international efforts to eliminate chemical weapons through a universal disarmament regime. Instead, Washington uses the alleged threat from chemical weapons as an excuse to target specific countries whose governments are seen as hostile to U.S. political and economic interests.

• One of the most effective instruments for international arms control in recent years has been the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), which enforces the Chemical Weapons Convention by inspecting laboratories, factories, and arsenals, and oversees the destruction of chemical weapons. The organization’s most successful director general, first elected in 1997, was the Brazilian diplomat Jose Bustani, praised by the Guardian newspaper as a “workaholic” who has “done more in the past five years to promote world peace than anyone.” Under his strong leadership, the number of signatories of the treaty grew from 87 to 145 nations, the fastest growth rate of any international organization in recent decades, and – during this same period – his inspectors oversaw the destruction of 2 million chemical weapons and two-thirds of the world’s chemical weapons facilities. Bustani was re-elected unanimously in May 2000 for a five-year term and was complimented by Secretary of State Colin Powell for his “very impressive” work.

• However, by 2002, the United States began raising objections to Bustani’s insistence that the OPCW inspect U.S. chemical weapons facilities with the same vigor it does for other signatories. More critically, the United States was concerned about Bustani’s efforts to get Iraq to sign the convention and open their facilities to surprise inspections as is done with other signatories. If Iraq did so, and the OPCW failed to locate evidence of chemical weapons that Washington claimed Saddam Hussein’s regime possessed, it would severely weaken American claims that Iraq was developing chemical weapons. U.S. efforts to remove Bustani by forcing a recall by the Brazilian government failed, as did a U.S.-sponsored vote of no confidence at the United Nations in March. That April, the United States began putting enormous pressure on some of the UN’s weaker countries to support its campaign to oust Bustani and threatened to withhold the United States’ financial contribution to the OPCW, which constituted more than 20 percent of its entire budget. Figuring it was better to get rid of its leader than risk the viability of the whole organization, a majority of nations, brought together in an unprecedented special session called by the United States, voted to remove Bustani.

• The Case of Iraq

• The first country to allegedly use chemical weapons in the Middle East was Great Britain in 1920, as part of its efforts to put down a rebellion by Iraqi tribesmen when British forces seized the country following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.According to Winston Churchill, who then held the position of Britain’s Secretary of State for War and Air, “I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas. I am strongly in favour of using poisonous gas against uncivilised tribes.”

• It was the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein, during the Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s, that used chemical weapons on a scale far greater than any country had dared since the weapons were banned nearly 90 years ago. The Iraqis inflicted close to 100,000 casualties among Iranian soldiers using banned chemical agents, resulting in 20,000 deaths and tens of thousands of long-term injuries.

• They were unable to do this alone, however. Despite ongoing Iraqi support for Abu Nidal and other terrorist groups during the 1980s, the Reagan administration removed Iraq from the State Department’s list of state sponsors of terrorism in order to provide the regime with thiodiglycol, a key component in the manufacture of mustard gas, and other chemical precursors for their weapons program. Walter Lang, a senior official with the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency, noted how “the use of gas on the battlefield by the Iraqis was not a matter of deep strategic concern” to President Reagan and other administration officials since they “were desperate to make sure that Iraq did not lose.” Lang noted that the DIA believed Iraq’s use of chemical was “seen as inevitable in the Iraqi struggle for survival.” In fact, DIA personnel were dispatched to Baghdad during the war to provide Saddam Hussein’s regime with U.S. satellite data on the location of Iranian troop concentrations in the full knowledge that the Iraqis were using chemical weapons against them.

• Even the Iraqi regime’s use of chemical weapons against civilians was not seen as particularly problematic. The March 1988 massacre in the northern Iraqi city of Halabja, where Saddam’s forces murdered up to 5,000 Kurdish civilians with chemical weapons, was downplayed by the Reagan administration, with some officials even falsely claiming that Iran was actually responsible. The United States continued sending aid to Iraq even after the regime’s use of poison gas was confirmed.

• When a 1988 Senate Foreign Relations committee staff report brought to light Saddam’s policy of widespread extermination in Iraqi Kurdistan, Senator Claiborne Pell introduced the Prevention

• of Genocide Act to put pressure on the Iraqi regime, but the Bush administration successfully moved to have the measure killed. This came despite evidence emerging from UN reports in 1986 and 1987, prior to the Halabja tragedy, documenting Iraq’s use of chemical weapons against Kurdish civilians—allegations that were confirmed both by investigations from the CIA and from U.S. embassy staff who had visited Iraqi Kurdish refugees in Turkey. However, not only was the United States not particularly concerned about Iraq’s use of chemical weapons, the Reagan administration continued supporting the Iraqi government’s procurement effort of materials necessary for their development.

• Given the U.S. culpability in the deaths of tens of thousands of people by Iraqi chemical weapons less than 25 years ago, the growing calls for the United States to go to war with Syria in response to that regime’s alleged use of chemical weapons that killed a few dozen people leads even many of Syrian dictator Bashar Assad’s fiercest opponents to question U.S. motivations.

• This is not the only reason U.S. credibility on the issue of chemical weapons is questionable, however.

• After denying and covering up Iraq’s use of chemical weapons in the late 1980s, the U.S. government—first under President Bill Clinton and then under President George W. Bush—began insisting that Iraq’s alleged chemical weapons stockpile was a dire threat, even though the country had completely destroyed its stockpile by 1993 and completely dismantled its chemical weapons program.

• Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State John Kerry, and Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel—when they served in the U.S. Senate in 2002—all voted to authorize the U.S. invasion of Iraq, insisting that Iraq still had a chemical weapons arsenal that was so extensive it constituted a serious threaten to the national security of the United States, despite the fact that Iraq had rid itself of all such weapons nearly a decade earlier. As a result, it is not unreasonable to question the accuracy of any claims they might make today in regard to Syria’s alleged use of chemical weapons.

• It should also be noted that many of today’s most outspoken congressional advocates for U.S. military intervention in Syria in response to the Damascus regime’s alleged use of chemical weapons were among the most strident advocates in 2002-2003 for invading Iraq. Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY), whom the Democrats have chosen to be their ranking member on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, was among the right-wing minority of House Democrats who voted to authorize the invasion of Iraq on the grounds that the country possessed weapons of mass destruction. When no such weapons were found, Engel came up with the bizarre allegation that “it would not surprise me if those weapons of mass destruction that we cannot find in Iraq wound up and are today in Syria.”

• Engel is currently the chief sponsor of the Free Syria Act of 2013 (H.R. 1327), which would authorize the United States to provide arms to Syrian rebels.

• UN resolutions

• Unlike the case of Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, there are no UN Security Council resolutions specifically demanding that Syria unilaterally disarm its chemical weapons or dismantle its chemical weapons program. Syria is believed to have developed its chemical weapons program only after Israel first developed its chemical, biological, and nuclear programs, all of which still exist today and by which the Syrians still feel threatened.

• However, UN Security Council Resolution 687, the resolution passed at the end of the 1991 Gulf War demanding the destruction of Iraq’s chemical weapons arsenal, also called on member states “to work towards the establishment in the Middle East of a zone free of such weapons.”

• Syria has joined virtually all other Arab states in calling for such a “weapons of mass destruction-free zone” for the entire Middle East. In December 2003, Syria introduced a UN Security Council resolution reiterating this clause from 12 years earlier, but the resolution was tabled as a result of a threatened U.S. veto. As I wrote at time, in reference to the Syrian Accountability Act, “By imposing strict sanctions on Syria for failing to disarm unilaterally, the administration and Congress has roundly rejected the concept of a WMD-free zone or any kind of regional arms control regime. Instead, the United States government is asserting that it has the authority to say which country can have what kind of weapons systems, thereby enforcing a kind of WMD apartheid, which will more likely encourage, rather than discourage, the proliferation of such dangerous weapons.”

• A case can be made, then, that had the United States pursued a policy that addressed the proliferation of non-conventional weapons through region-wide disarmament rather than trying to single out Syria, the Syrian regime would have rid itself of its chemical weapons some years earlier along with Israel and Egypt, and the government’s alleged use of such ordnance—which is now propelling the United States to increase its involvement in that country’s civil war—would have never become an issue.

• This was originally published at Foreign Policy in Focus.

• Pasted from <http://antiwar.com/blog/2013/05/07/the-us-and-chemical-weapons-no-leg-to-stand-on/>

by Marjorie Cohn and Jeanne Mirer
August 28, 2013
from GlobalResearch Website
Marjorie Cohn is a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, former president of the National Lawyers Guild (NLG), and deputy secretary general of the International Association
of Democratic Lawyers (IADL).
New York attorney Jeanne Mirer is president of the IADL and co-chair of the NLG’s International Committee.
Both Cohn and Mirer are on the board of the Vietnam Agent Orange Relief and Responsibility Campaign

The Obama administration will reportedly launch a military strike to punish Syria’s Assad government for its alleged use of chemical weapons. A military attack would invariably kill civilians for the ostensible purpose of showing the Syrian government that killing civilians is wrong.
    “What we are talking about here is a potential response… to this specific violation of international norms,” declared White House press secretary Jay Carney.
But a military intervention by the United States in Syria to punish the government would violate international law.

For the United States to threaten to and/or launch a military strike as a reprisal is a blatant violation of the United Nations Charter. The Charter requires countries to settle their international disputes peacefully.

Article 2(4) makes it illegal for any country to either use force or threaten to use force against another country. Article 2(7) prohibits intervention in an internal or domestic dispute in another country.

NATO Using Chemical WeaponsThe only time military force is lawful under the Charter is when the Security Council approves it, or under Article 51, which allows a country to defend itself if attacked.
    “The use of chemical weapons within Syria is not an armed attack on the United States,” according to Notre Dame law professor Mary Ellen O’Connell.
The United States and the international community have failed to take constructive steps to promote peace-making efforts, which could have brought the crisis in Syria to an end.

The big powers instead have waged a proxy war to give their “side” a stronger hand in future negotiations, evaluating the situation only in terms of geopolitical concerns. The result has been to once again demonstrate that military solutions to political and economic problems are no solution at all.

In the meantime, the fans of enmity between religious factions have been inflamed to such a degree that the demonization of each by the other has created fertile ground for slaughter and excuses for not negotiating with anyone with “blood on their hands.”

Despite U.S. claims of “little doubt that Assad used these weapons,” there is significant doubt among the international community about which side employed chemical weapons.

Many view the so-called ‘rebels’ as trying to create a situation to provoke U.S. intervention against Assad. Indeed, in May, Carla del Ponte, former international prosecutor and current UN commissioner on Syria, concluded that opposition forces used sarin gas against civilians.

The use of any type of chemical weapon by any party would constitute a war crime. Chemical weapons that kill and maim people are illegal and their use violates the laws of war. The illegality of chemical and poisoned weapons was first established by the Hague regulations of 1899 and Hague Convention of 1907.

It was reiterated in the Geneva Convention of 1925 and the Chemical Weapons Convention.

The Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court specifically states that employing,
    “poison or poisoned weapons” and “asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and all analogous liquids, materials or devices” are war crimes, under Article 8.
The prohibition on the use of these weapons is an international norm regardless of whether any convention has been ratified.

As these weapons do not distinguish between military combatants and civilians, they violate the principle of distinction and the ban on weapons which cause unnecessary suffering and death contained in the Hague Convention.

Under the Nuremberg Principles, violations of the laws of war are war crimes.

The self-righteousness of the United States about the alleged use of chemical weapons by Assad is hypocritical. The United States used napalm and employed massive amounts of chemical weapons in the form of Agent Orange in Vietnam, which continues to affect countless people over many generations.

Recently declassified CIA documents reveal U.S. complicity in Saddam Hussein’s use of chemical weapons during the Iran-Iraq war, according to Foreign Policy:
    “In contrast to today’s wrenching debate over whether the United States should intervene to stop alleged chemical weapons attacks by the Syrian government, the United States applied a cold calculus three decades ago to Hussein’s widespread use of chemical weapons against his enemies and his own people.
   
    The Reagan administration decided that it was better to let the attacks continue if they might turn the tide of the war. And even if they were discovered, the CIA wagered that international outrage and condemnation would be muted.”
In Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States used,
        1. cluster bombs
        2. depleted uranium
        3. white phosphorous gas
            § Cluster bomb cannisters contain tiny bomblets, which can spread over a vast area.

Unexploded cluster bombs are frequently picked up by children and explode, resulting in serious injury or death.
            § Depleted uranium (DU) weapons spread high levels of radiation over vast areas of land. In Iraq, there has been a sharp increase in Leukemia and birth defects, probably due to DU.
            § White phosphorous gas melts the skin and burns to the bone.
The Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in time of War (Geneva IV) classifies “willfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health” as a grave breach, which constitutes a war crime.

The use of chemical weapons, regardless of the purpose, is atrocious, no matter the feigned justification.

A government’s use of such weapons against its own people is particularly reprehensible. Secretary of State John Kerry said that the purported attack by Assad’s forces,
    “defies any code of morality” and should “shock the conscience of the world.”
He went on to say that,
    “there must be accountability for those who would use the world’s most heinous weapons against the world’s most vulnerable people.”
Yet the U.S. militarily occupied over 75% of the Puerto Rican island of Vieques for 60 years, during which time the Navy routinely practiced with, and used,
        ○ Agent Orange
        ○ depleted uranium
        ○ napalm,
…and other toxic chemicals and metals such as TNT and mercury.

This occurred within a couple of miles of a civilian population that included thousands of U.S. citizens. The people of Vieques have lived under the colonial rule of the United States now for 115 years and suffer from terminal health conditions such as elevated rates of cancer, hypertension, respiratory and skin illnesses and kidney failure.

While Secretary Kerry calls for accountability by the Assad government, the U.S. Navy has yet to admit, much less seek atonement, for decades of bombing and biochemical warfare on Vieques.

The U.S. government’s moral outrage at the use of these weapons falls flat as it refuses to take responsibility for its own violations.

President Barack Obama admitted,
    “If the U.S. goes in and attacks another country without a UN mandate and without clear evidence that can be presented, then there are questions in terms of whether international law supports it…”
The Obama administration is studying the 1999,
    “NATO air war in Kosovo as a possible blueprint for acting without a mandate from the United Nations,” the New York Times reported.
But NATO’s Kosovo bombing also violated the UN Charter as the Security Council never approved it, and it was not carried out in self-defense.

The UN Charter does not permit the use of military force for “humanitarian interventions.” Humanitarian concerns do not constitute self-defense. In fact, humanitarian concerns should spur the international community to seek peace and end the suffering, not increase military attacks, which could endanger peace in the entire region.

Moreover, as Phyllis Bennis of the Institute for Policy Studies and David Wildman of Human Rights & Racial Justice for the Global Ministries of the United Methodist Church wrote,
    “Does anyone really believe that a military strike on an alleged chemical weapons factory would help the Syrian people, would save any lives, would help bring an end to this horrific civil war”?
Military strikes will likely result in the escalation of Syria’s civil war.
    “Let’s be clear,” Bennis and Wildman note. “Any U.S. military attack, cruise missiles or anything else, will not be to protect civilians – it will mean taking sides once again in a bloody, complicated civil war.”
Anthony Cordesman, military analyst from the Center for Strategic and International Studies, asks,
    “Can you do damage with cruise missiles? Yes. Can you stop them from having chemical weapons capability? I would think the answer would be no.”
The United States and its allies must refrain from military intervention in Syria and take affirmative steps to promote a durable ceasefire and a political solution consistent with international law.

If the U.S. government were truly interested in fomenting peace and promoting accountability, it should apologize to and compensate the victims of its own use of chemical weapons around the world.

Pasted from <http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol_middleeast107.htm>

April 23, 2013 by NATASHA LONGO

Earth Balance is a company that claims to “take the health of our planet just as seriously as we take the wellness of our customers.” They also assert this position with a Non-GMO commitment believing in “environmental protection and agricultural methods that work in harmony with nature.” When we investigated Earth Balance, we found these statements to be purely superficial marketing tactics designed to deceive consumers into purchasing foods manufactured with ingredients which completely contradict their corporate philosophy statements. 

Many Kashi lovers were in disbelief after my report revealing the deceptive claims made by their breakfast products. As a Kellogg company, Kashi stays true their corporate masters and riddles their products with genetically modified (GM) and pesticide loaded ingredients.

The reason more organic and natural brands are being exposed is twofold: First, many of them are being bought out by large multi-national corporate food giants who then adopt their own protocols, including diminished standards of quality and deceptive policy practices considered normal across the industry; and second, agricultural and labeling practices have become so lax and unregulated by the USDA and other organic certification agencies, that they are practically redundant in terms of any protection to the consumer.

The largest food giants have one goal–profit. They couldn’t care less about the end consumer, their safety or the growing needs of a family, especially if that involves maintaining integrity through health conscious food choices. That’s why they produce the cheapest quality food on Earth with little nutritional value and maximum profit potential.

Health conscious consumers became wise to their game long ago. So the food giants had to evolve to continue to increase profits and capture these segments of the population they had lost. As small organic brands proliferated, they were bought out by the big boys who had the money, resources and branding power to reformulate high quality products into inferior substandard duplicates. This has happened to hundreds of organic brands and so the cycle continues.

There are now hundreds of trendy brands promoting a plant-based diet and earth-friendly lifestyle through their online portals and social communities. They attract raw foodies, vegans, vegetarians and just about anybody else who thrives on an alternative source to our troubled conventional food supply. These trendy umbrella affiliates have become very creative in how they reach out to the health conscious communities.

Earth Balance is just one of them.

Why You Should Never Buy Earth Balance Products

Earth Balance is a division of GFA Brands, Inc., an operating affiliate and subsidiary of Smart Balance. So who are they?

Smart Balance buttery spreads were first introduced in 1995 by GFA Brands. The company was previously known as Boulder Specialty Brands, Inc., and had its initial public offering in 2005. They changed their name to Smart Balance, Inc. in May 2007, when they acquired GFA Brands, Inc., a privately held company, which owned the Smart Balance and Earth Balance brands.

Their products can be found in almost every mainstream supermarket chain in the U.S. and Canada, as well as many larger format stores. Earth Balance products are found primarily in natural food as well as a growing number of regular supermarkets.

Smart Balance is already a fairly big player in their market niche. Their net sales are well over 300 million per year with well established profits and operating incomes that would impress any shareholder. But they didn’t get there by using the best ingredients and staying true to the people that bought into their market. They got there by using artful persuasion and malicious practices which deceive people into purchasing a message about food rather than a food that epitomizes the message.

Before I dive further into the details of Earth Balance products, I would like to categorically state that even before investigating this company, I never ate or purchased any of their products. I’ve always considered their product line junk food. In my opinion, healthy food does not contain processed GMO oils and Soy and it never will. These are two of the ingredients commonly used in many Earth Balance food products. Neither are a health food and both can cause serious health problems in the long-term.

Soy (TOXIC)

For a brief analysis on the health dangers of soy, please review #2 on my recent article, 7 Foods To Stop Consuming Today.

If you still trust ANYTHING about soy, you likely have not completed sufficient research to make a fully informed decision. If you were to carefully review the thousands of studies published on soy, you would likely reach the same conclusions–the risks of consuming unfermented soy products FAR outweigh any possible benefits.

Soy is very problematic crop. Non-organic sources of soy in many agricultural practices are being passed off as organic. In 2011, the USDA uncovered a plot to import fraudulent organic certificates produced by an uncertified supplier in China. The Chinese firm used the counterfeit certificate to represent non-organic crops, including soybeans, millet and buckwheat, as certified organic.

Any ingredient listed as soybean or soy on any product ingredient list has a 93% chance of being GMO if it is not listed as organic.

These types of things are happening every year and only a fraction are being discovered. Even domestically sourced organic soybean crops are now being investigated for having GMO origins. You cannot trust the soy conglomerates. The industry has dumped millions into persuading people that soy is a health food when it’s really a junk food, especially modern soy in all its processing. There are very few types of soy that are healthy for the body and all go through a very slow stringent fermentation processes, none of which you will ever obtain in a processed food spread or milk.

The bottom line when it comes to soy is that we are all participating in what Daniel M. Sheehan, former senior toxicologist with the FDA’s National Center for Toxicological Research, has called a “large, uncontrolled and basically unmonitored human experiment.”

Canola (TOXIC)

After the public health scare (or fear mongering) in the 1970s over animal fats, sales of vegetable oils of all types increased. It was the established wisdom that those oils high in polyunsaturated fatty acids were especially beneficial. The obsession with polyunsaturated versus saturated fats led researchers and nutritionists to overlook some of the other features of vegetable oils that we now know are crucial to health, including:

• Susceptibility to rancidity;

• Ratio of omega-3 to omega-6 fatty acids and its relevance in inflammatory diseases and immune system function;

• Possible presence of irritating or toxic compounds in particular plant oils.

Although Chinese and Indian peoples have long used rapeseed oil in cooking, it was not refined and processed to the extent of modern commercial methods, and it was never considered to be a high quality oil for human consumption.

Canola oil contains a long-chain fatty acid called erucic acid, which is especially irritating to mucous membranes; canola oil consumption has been correlated with development of fibrotic lesions of the heart, CNS degenerative disorders, lung cancer, and prostate cancer, anemia, and constipation.

The long-chain fatty acids found in canola have been found to destroy the sphingomyelin surrounding nerve cells in the brain, in some cases leading to a degenerative brain condition remarkably similar to mad-cow disease (bovine spongiform encephalopathy); in advanced cases the brain tissue develops a Swiss-cheese-like appearance, full of holes. Illnesses and conditions that have been associated with canola oil consumption include loss of vision (retinal capillaries are very sensitive and easily damaged), and a wide range of neurological disorders.

Today, even those who are moderately educated about nutrition understand that Canola (also known as rapeseed) is not a health food and it could not possibly ever be classified as organic due to its breeding and origin.

The toxic properties of the rape plant are cyanide-containing compounds called isothiocyanates. Wild animals will not eat the plant and many farmers report that their animals will not eat feed contaminated with canola.

In various studies, experimental rats fed canola oil developed fatty degeneration of the heart, kidney, adrenals, and thyroid gland. On withdrawing the canola oil from their diets, the deposits dissolved but scar tissue remained on all vital organs.

Genetically modified Canola was derived in the 70s from cross-breeding of multiple lines of the rape plant to produce a much lower percentage of erucic acid, a known food borne toxin. Thus, Canola is GMO by design and organic canola is a misnomer. It’s another industry tactic to make consumers believe something is organic in nature which has never been by origin.

In the last 20 years we have seen a dramatic increase in muscular disorders such as multiple sclerosis and cerebral palsy. Soy and Canola oils are players in the outbreak of these disease conditions. So are the organophosphates–insecticides such as malthion– used in food production in the name of efficiency.

Canola contains fats that experts say should not be exposed to heat, yet it is usually exposed to high temperatures, and then deodorized and bleached. It has been shown to deplete vitamin E levels in mammals. The plant itself (rapeseed) is an insect repellent and used in industrial manufacturing. Soybean oil has been linked to breast cancer and its high levels of Omega-6s linked to inflammatory diseases and its omega-3s converted into the undesirable trans form. Even “lightly refined” and “expeller pressed oils can be exposed to deodorizing, which may raise the oil temperature to a sizzling 450 deg F. When metabolized in the body, it produces the latex-like substance that causes the agglutination of red blood cells.

GMO Sugar Beets (TOXIC)

In July 2012 genetically modified sugar beets got a sweet pass from the USDA. The agency announced that the crop posed no pest risk and would therefore be deregulated, much to the disappointment of groups like the Center for Food Safety, Organic Seed Alliance, High Mowing Organic Seeds and the Sierra Club, that challenged the agency in a lawsuit stretching back to 2008, on the premise that not enough research had been done over the environmental impacts of the genetically engineered crop.

Nearly 95 percent of the U.S. sugar beet production is grown from genetically modified seeds — a swift change from 2005 when they were first approved for planting. More than half of U.S. domestic sugar production comes from sugar beets, the remainder comes from sugar cane.

At one point there was a nationwide ban imposed on GMO sugar beets and it was overturned the next business day. It is the jurisdiction of the US Department of Agriculture to determine whether plants are environmentally safe; this case is about whether the plants can cross pollinate (by wind, insects, etc) and contaminate other plants. However, the USDA never properly assigns itself a responsible enough position to investigate this task because it would cost Monsanto billions of dollars and we wouldn’t want that.

Palm Fruit Oil (BAN)

Palm Fruit oil is taken from the fruit of the oil palm tree. It comes from the same part of the palm tree as regular palm oil.

Indonesia has achieved its goal of becoming one of the two largest palm-oil producers and exporters in the world. But at what cost?

At least half of the world’s wild orangutans have disappeared in the last 20 years; biologically viable populations of orangutans have been radically reduced in size and number; and 80 percent of the orangutan habitat has either been depopulated or totally destroyed. The trend shows no sign of abating: government maps of future planned land use show more of the same, on an increasing scale.

In Malaysia, peat swamp forests are being obliterated, and the disappearing forests endangering the habitat of the “pygmy elephant — the smallest elephant on Earth — the clouded leopard, the long-nosed tapir and many rare birds.”

As word spreads about the devastation that palm oil cultivation can cause, people are beginning to take notice and companies are beginning to make changes. Sustainable palm oil is in its infancy, and according to Worldwatch Institute, palm oil sustainability criteria remain controversial.

Palm Fruit Oil is simply another ingredient that needs to be banned from our food supply. We don’t need it if it’s not sustainable in the health of our ecosystems or wildlife.

Agave Syrup (TOXIC)

Fully chemically processed sap from the agave plant is known as hydrolyzed high fructose inulin syrup. It needs to be hydrolyzed so that the complex fructosans are “broken down” into fructose units or it won’t be sweet!
According to Dr. Ingrid Kohlstadt, a fellow of the American College of Nutrition and an associate faculty member at Johns Hopkins School of Public Health:
“[Agave is] almost all fructose, highly processed sugar with great marketing.”
Depending upon where the agave comes from and the amount of heat used to process it, your agave syrup can be anywhere from 55 percent to 90 percent fructose, whereas sugar and honey are closer to 50% fructose and 50% glucose. Fructose is much sweeter than glucose, and this chemical makeup also explains why the glycemic index is lower (it only takes glucose into account).
This range of fructose content hardly makes agave syrup a logical choice if you’re hoping to avoid the high levels of fructose in HFCS (high fructose corn syrup).
Since most agave syrup has such a high percentage of fructose, your blood sugar will likely spike just as it would if you were consuming regular sugar or HFCS, and you would also run the risk of raising your triglyceride levels. It’s also important to understand that whereas the glucose in other sugars are converted to blood glucose, fructose is a relatively unregulated source of fuel that your liver converts to fat and cholesterol.
A significant danger here is that fructose does not stimulate your insulin secretion, nor enhance leptin production, which is thought to be involved in appetite regulation.
Fructose may also interfere with your body’s ability to metabolize copper. This can result in depletion of collagen and elastin, which are vital connective tissues. A copper deficiency can also result in anemia, fragile bones, defects in your arteries, infertility, high cholesterol and heart disease, and uncontrolled blood sugar levels.
Additionally, fructose consumption has been shown to significantly increase uric acid. Elevated levels of uric acid are markers for heart disease. It has also been shown to increase blood lactic acid, especially in diabetics. Elevations in lactic acid can result in metabolic acidosis.
Isolated fructose has no enzymes, vitamins or minerals and can rob your body of these nutrients in order to assimilate itself. Hence, consumption of fructose can also lead to loss of vital minerals like calcium, iron, magnesium, and zinc.

Exposing Earth Balance Products

*** SPREADS ***

Original:
Toxic Ingredients = GMO Canola, GMO Soybean, Natural Flavor (GMO corn derived), Lactic Acid (from GMO Sugar Beets)
Eco Destructive Ingredients = Palm Fruit Oil

Olive Oil:
Toxic Ingredients = GMO Canola, GMO Soybean, Natural Flavor (GMO corn derived), Lactic Acid (from GMO Sugar Beets)
Eco Destructive Ingredients = Palm Fruit Oil

Soy Free:
Toxic Ingredients = GMO Canola, Natural Flavor (GMO corn derived), Lactic Acid (from GMO Sugar Beets)
Eco Destructive Ingredients = Palm Fruit Oil

Soy Garden:
Toxic Ingredients = GMO Soybean, GMO crushed Soybeans, Natural Flavor (GMO corn derived), Lactic Acid (from GMO Sugar Beets)
Eco Destructive Ingredients = Palm Fruit Oil

Organic Whipped:
Toxic Ingredients = GMO Canola, Lactic Acid (from GMO Sugar Beets)
Eco Destructive Ingredients = Palm Fruit Oil

*** SOY MILK ***

Soy (Toxic):
Soy in all of Earth Balance’s Soymilk does not follow the slow stringent fermentation process necessary to make soy non-toxic. Consequently the entire Soymilk product line is toxic by their primary ingredient.

Carrageenan (Toxic):
The entire Soymilk line also contains Carrageenan, which acts as an emulsifer and stabilizer. All Carrageenan is typically extracted using powerful alkaline solvents. Even at low doses, it has been found to destroy human cells and is linked to various human cancers and digestive disorders. Carrageenan has also been found to impair and depress cell-mediated immunity and cause the proliferation of tumour growth. The mechanism responsible for carrageenan-induced immune suppression is believed to be its selective degenerative effect on white blood cells.

*** DRESSINGS ***

All Dressings contain GMO Canola

*** BAKING STICKS ***

Shortening:
Toxic Ingredients = GMO Canola

Vegan Butter Sticks:
Toxic Ingredients = GMO Canola, GMO Soybean, Natural Flavor (GMO corn derived), Lactic Acid (from GMO Sugar Beets)

*** NUT BUTTERS ***

All Nut Butters contain:
Toxic Ingredients = Agave Syrup
Eco Destructive Ingredients = Palm Fruit Oil

*** CULINARY SPREADS ***

Organic Coconut:
Toxic Ingredients = GMO Canola Oil, Lactic Acid (from GMO Sugar Beets)
Eco Destructive Ingredients = Palm Fruit Oil

Organic Sweet Cinnamon:
Toxic Ingredients = Crushed Soybeans, Soybean Oil, Soy Lecithin
Eco Destructive Ingredients = Palm Fruit Oil

Organic Sweet Cinnamon:
Toxic Ingredients = Crushed Soybeans, Soybean Oil, Soy Lecithin
Eco Destructive Ingredients = Palm Fruit Oil

After reviewing all of the above, is this a company that takes the health of our planet just as serious as they do health and wellness? They do not protect the environment or source ingredients from agricultural methods that work in harmony with nature. They do not uphold their Non-GMO commitment and they continue to use toxic emulsifiers and sweeteners.

Earth Balance should be ashamed of their misrepresentation and I urge you to help educate others by sharing this information with as many health conscious consumers as possible. The only way we will stimulate a call for action and bring a greater sense of integrity to the health food industry is by exposing companies like Smart Balance and their subsidiary Earth Balance.

Natasha Longo has a master’s degree in nutrition and is a certified fitness and nutritional counselor. She has consulted on public health policy and procurement in Canada, Australia, Spain, Ireland, England and Germany.

Sources:
organicauthority.com
smartbalance.com
proliberty.com
cornucopia.org
takepart.com
preventdisease.com
nytimes.com
wikipedia.org
rmhiherbal.org
thehealthyhomeeconomist.com

• 7 Foods To Stop Consuming Today

  Source: preventdisease.com/news/13/042213_Earth-Balance-Betrays-Consumers-With-False-Non-GMO-and-Organic-Claims.shtml 

Everything Is A Lie: 

The Deliberate Intent To Deceive People Is At An All Time High

From pollution to politics, the era of deception and duplicity has reached new heights and hijacked almost every form of media in the world. In the last frontiers for truth such as the internet, disinformation operations are in full swing to discredit and destroy any semblance of authentic and factual information available to the public.
How many more lies will people around the world accept as truth? Some say a global awakening is taking place, but at what cost? Will it take the destruction of most of the earth and its resources before people are enlightened?

The escalating media and political reports are so far fetched, cunning, and so beyond reality, it’s as if each is trying to top the other with one sinister plot after the next. To demonstrate the outright lies by national governments and the media, let’s take three examples from the last year alone, including the H1N1 scandal, airport body scanners and the BP oil disaster.

The H1N1 Scandal

Last year, the H1N1 scandal reached its pinnacle in the fall of 2009 when the world united on the internet with a consensus and practical understanding of the World Health Organization’s orchestratration to deceive the masses. From radio, internet, television, newspapers, magazines, outdoor posters, signage and promotions, you could not escape the flu hype campaigns so diligently pursued by all the malicious agendas at play who only wanted one thing – to promote a dangerous H1N1 vaccine. After hundreds of reports exposed the criminal activity by all levels of government, we left the same people in power to do it all over again.

According to preliminary reports, another round of pandemic vaccine campaigns are scheduled for the 2010/2011 season and they’re already underway. However, there appears to be a recombination that has changed the H1N1 lab created virus into a more lethal form and it is not a hoax, but it may be yet another CDC lab experiment.

The CDC has recently issued a Health Advisory in connection with two summer outbreaks of H3N2 in Iowa. Other reports from Russia and India indicate that a real epidemic may be upon us if the virus steadily recombines and acquires new genetics. Even though a new strain may have accidentally evolved in eggs, reassortment of H1N1-H5N1 has been a legitimate concern for years. The WHO first suggested the reassortment of H1N1-H5N1 in 2004.

If this is really the case, how will the public react after all the lies from health agencies who have sworn to protect us? Will they hype another vaccine and if so, will the public even respond?

Body Scanners

They’ve been approved all over the world and marketed as the next greatest airport scanning technology. The U.S., U.K., Russia, Australia, Europe and Canada have all installed airport body scanners which have potentially devastating health effects.

Many of these scanners are reportedly using terahertz (THz) waves, the radiation that fills the slot in the electromagnetic spectrum between microwaves and infrared. Evidence suggests that although the forces generated are tiny, resonant effects allow THz waves to unzip double-stranded DNA, creating bubbles in the double strand that could significantly interfere with processes such as gene expression and DNA replication.
As the path toward rolling out wider use of whole-body scanners in U.S. airports ran through the White House, Obama expedited their deployment because the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Transportation Security Administration (TSA) didn’t need legislation from Congress to start using the devices at any of the 560 U.S. airports.
The White House ignored all the scientific evidence presented which suggested negative health effects. Politicians and regulatory agencies then covered up the bad publicity on naked body scanners and focused on the presumed benefits under the guise of public safety.

Privacy commisioners and airport authorities have also insisted that there were no risks of images being stored or personal details being revealed to security screeners. Now there’s new evidence to show that the scanners can do just that.

According to a CNET report, another federal agency, the U.S. Marshall’s service, admitted that it had actually stored over 30,000 images recorded by a full-body scanner used at a Florida courthouse.
A watchdog group called the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) obtained over 100 of the images and states on its web site that, “The images, which are routinely captured by the federal agency, prove that body scanning devices store and record images of individuals stripped naked.” The group has filed a lawsuit to suspend the deployment of body scanners at airports.

EPIC also discovered that the TSA actually specified to manufacturers that the machines have the ability to send and store images. The TSA says that these functions are only for testing and training and insists on its web site that the airport body scanners are delivered to airports with storage and recording functions disabled.

Again, the upper levels of the echelon are caught lying and deceiving, yet they are still left to their own devices to further manipulate and continue misrepresenting facts to the gullible public.

BP Oil Disaster

When news unfolded about the April 20, 2010 BP oil disaster, it went from bad to worse. Instead of immediately mobilizing for action in the face of a massive public health threat, the response was to cover-up, deny and respond with ignorance. After all the public will always believe them, or so they thought.
The Obama administration, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, U.S. Coast Guard commandant admiral Thad Allen, energy and climate-change policy adviser Carol Browner, BP and all their contituents conspired to deliberately mislead the public from the inception of the disaster to present day. What’s worse is they all agreed to further disseminate toxins in the Gulf by spraying 1.8 to 2 million gallons of the neurotoxin Corexit which was exposed by over a hundred scientists, toxicologists and other experts who have unequivocally classified the irresponsible aerial spraying of the chemical dispersant as a large-scale, uncontrolled non-consensual human and environmental experiment is being conducted in the Gulf region.
The media was grossly censoring the extent of the devastation in the Gulf. The poisons–oil and corexit are destined to spread globally, but honest reporting was and still is restricted, and many independent investigators have been arrested. Read 30 Facts Evidencing that The Gulf Oil Crisis Was Planned.
On June 12, 2010, The Institute of Atmospheric Sciences and Climate (ISAC) released “Risk of Global Climate Change By BP Oil Spill“, a document detailing how the BP spill may cause irreparable damage to the Gulf Stream global climate thermoregulation activity. Read Gulf Loop Current Destroyed: May Lead To Shut Down of Atlantic Thermoregulation, Rapid Cooling.

According to Dr. Gianluigi Zangari, an Italian theoretical physicist, and major complex and chaotic systems analyst at the Frascati National Laboratories in Italy, the Loop Current in the Gulf of Mexico has stalled as a consequence of the BP oil spill disaster. Zangari notes that the effects of this stall have also begun to spread to the Gulf Stream. This is because the Loop Current is a crucial element of the Gulf Stream itself and why it is commonly referred to as the “main engine” of the Stream.

The concern now, is whether or not natural processes can re-establish the stalled Loop Current. If not, we could begin to see global crop failures as early as 2011.

Zangari’s assessment is based on daily monitoring of real-time data oceanographic satellite public data feeds called “Real-Time Mesoscale Altimetry” from the Jason, Topex/Poseidon, Geosat, Follow-On, ERS-2 and Envisat satellites.

These satellite feeds are captured and made publicly available by NASA, NOAA and by the Colorado Center for Astrodynamics Research (CCAR) at the University of Colorado at Boulder.
The CCAR is now being accused of scientific fraud and tampering of data directly associated with the events surrounding the Loop Current phenomenon and its current anomalies. Various reporters have spear-headed the charge including radio personality Dr. Bill Deagle who has featured Dr. Zangari on his radio show The Nutrimedical Report where he detailed the events leading up to the destruction of the Loop Current in the Gulf.

Dr. Zangari has stated that he will no longer use CCAR data due to its unreliability.

Organized and Professional Disinformation Operations
Well-funded and highly-organized disinformation operations are in full-swing throughout the internet. From forums to comment boards and even professional websites that have only one purpose: Defame, distract, and destroy the truth.

However organized, the tactics are very predictable in a world filled with lies and half-truths. This, sadly, includes every day news media, one of the worst offenders with respect to being a source of disinformation.

Disinformation campaigns are launched against those seeking to uncover and expose the truth and/or the conspiracy. The H1N1 scandal was a prime example of how hundreds of operations can be launched to sway opinions on the facts. For every fact-based article on the realities of the H1N1 vaccine, there were both very primitive and sophisticated counters on message boards, comment forums and hundreds of alternative and mainstream websites.

Stephen Barrett’s Quackwatch.com and supporters such as skeptic.org.uk and skepticblog.com are examples of websites which promote both synthetic and organic disinformation on almost any topic that does not concur with mainstream thought.

There are specific tactics which disinfo artists tend to apply, as H. Michael Sweeney has brilliantly detailed. Also included with this material are eight common traits of the disinfo artist which may also prove useful in identifying players and motives. The more a particular party fits the traits and is guilty of following the rules, the more likely they are a professional disinfo artist with a vested motive. People can be bought, threatened, or blackmailed into providing disinformation, so even “good guys” can be suspect in many cases.
A rational person participating as one interested in the truth will evaluate that chain of evidence and conclude either that the links are solid and conclusive, that one or more links are weak and need further development before conclusion can be arrived at, or that one or more links can be broken, usually invalidating (but not necessarily so, if parallel links already exist or can be found, or if a particular link was merely supportive, but not in itself key) the argument. The game is played by raising issues which either strengthen or weaken (preferably to the point of breaking) these links. It is the job of a disinfo artist to interfere with these evaluation… to at least make people think the links are weak or broken when, in truth, they are not… or to propose alternative solutions leading away from the truth. Often, by simply impeding and slowing down the process through disinformation tactics, a level of victory is assured because apathy increases with time and rhetoric.
It would seem true in almost every instance, that if one cannot break the chain of evidence for a given solution, revelation of truth has won out. If the chain is broken either a new link must be forged, or a whole new chain developed, or the solution is invalid an a new one must be found… but truth still wins out. There is no shame in being the creator or supporter of a failed solution, chain, or link, if done with honesty in search of the truth. This is the rational approach. While it is understandable that a person can become emotionally involved with a particular side of a given issue, it is really unimportant who wins, as long as truth wins. But the disinfo artist will seek to emotionalize and chastise any failure (real or false claims thereof), and will seek by means of intimidation to prevent discussion in general.
It is the disinfo artist and those who may pull their strings (those who stand to suffer should the crime be solved) MUST seek to prevent rational and complete examination of any chain of evidence which would hang them. Since fact and truth seldom fall on their own, they must be overcome with lies and deceit. Those who are professional in the art of lies and deceit, such as the intelligence community and the professional criminal (often the same people or at least working together), tend to apply fairly well defined and observable tools in this process. However, the public at large is not well armed against such weapons, and is often easily led astray by these time-proven tactics. Remarkably, not even media and law enforcement have NOT BEEN TRAINED to deal with these issues. For the most part, only the players themselves understand the rules of the game.

Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don’t discuss it — especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it’s not reported, it didn’t happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.
2. Become incredulous and indignant.
Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used to show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the ‘How dare you!’ gambit.
3. Create rumor mongers.
Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method works especially well with a silent press because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such ‘arguable rumors’. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a ‘wild rumor’ from a ‘bunch of kids on the Internet’ which can have no basis in fact.
4. Use a straw man.
Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule.
This is also known as the primary ‘attack the messenger’ ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as ‘kooks’, ‘right-wing’, ‘liberal’, ‘left-wing’, ‘terrorists’, ‘conspiracy buffs’, ‘radicals’, ‘militia’, ‘racists’, ‘religious fanatics’, ‘sexual deviates’, and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
6. Hit and Run.
In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain critical reasoning — simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent’s viewpoint.
7. Question motives.
Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
8. Invoke authority.
Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough ‘jargon’ and ‘minutia’ to illustrate you are ‘one who knows’, and simply say it isn’t so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.
9. Play Dumb.
No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
10. Associate opponent charges with old news.
A derivative of the straw man — usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with – a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues — so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions.
Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the ‘high road’ and ‘confess’ with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made — but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, ‘just aren’t so.’ Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later, and even publicly ‘call for an end to the nonsense’ because you have already ‘done the right thing.’ Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for ‘coming clean’ and ‘owning up’ to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.
12. Enigmas have no solution.
Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic.
Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which forbears any actual material fact.
14. Demand complete solutions.
Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10.
15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions.
This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.
16. Vanish evidence and witnesses.
If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won’t have to address the issue.
17. Change the subject.
Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can ‘argue’ with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents.
If you can’t do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how ‘sensitive they are to criticism.’
19. Ignore facts presented, demand impossible proofs.
This is perhaps a variant of the ‘play dumb’ rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.
20. False evidence.
Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations — as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.
21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body.
Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed an unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed. Usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim.
22. Manufacture a new truth.
Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.
23. Create bigger distractions.
If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.
24. Silence critics.
If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health.
25. Vanish.
If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.
Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist

1) Avoidance
They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.
2) Selectivity
They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach against mere commentators supportive of opponents, or focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues. Should a commentator become argumentative with any success, the focus will shift to include the commentator as well.
3) Coincidental
They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a new controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussions in the particular public arena involved. They likewise tend to vanish once the topic is no longer of general concern. They were likely directed or elected to be there for a reason, and vanish with the reason.
4) Teamwork
They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.
5) Anti-conspiratorial
They almost always have disdain for ‘conspiracy theorists’ and, usually, for those who in any way believe JFK was not killed by LHO. Ask yourself why, if they hold such disdain for conspiracy theorists, do they focus on defending a single topic discussed in a News Group (NG) focusing on conspiracies? One might think they would either be trying to make fools of everyone on every topic, or simply ignore the group they hold in such disdain. Or, one might more rightly conclude they have an ulterior motive for their actions in going out of their way to focus as they do.
6) Artificial Emotions
An odd kind of ‘artificial’ emotionalism and an unusually thick skin — an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive. The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial. Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their rebuttal.
But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the ‘image’ and are hot and cold with respect to pretended emotions and their usually more calm or unemotional communications style. It’s just a job, and they often seem unable to ‘act their role in character’ as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face conversation/confrontation.
You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later — an emotional yo-yo. With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game — where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth, or simply give up.
7) Inconsistent
There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. This may stem from not really knowing their topic, or it may be somewhat ‘freudian’, so to speak, in that perhaps they really root for the side of truth deep within.
I have noted that often, they will simply cite contradictory information which neutralizes itself and the author. For instance, one such player claimed to be a Navy pilot, but blamed his poor communicating skills (spelling, grammar, incoherent style) on having only a grade-school education. I’m not aware of too many Navy pilots who don’t have a college degree. Another claimed no knowledge of a particular topic/situation but later claimed first-hand knowledge of it.
8) Time Constant
There are three ways this can be seen to work, especially when the government or other empowered player is involved in a cover up operation:

• ANY NG posting by a targeted proponent for truth can result in an IMMEDIATE response. The government and other empowered players can afford to pay people to sit there and watch for an opportunity to do some damage. SINCE DISINFO IN A NG ONLY WORKS IF THE READER SEES IT – FAST RESPONSE IS CALLED FOR, or the visitor may be swayed towards truth.
  
  

• When dealing in more direct ways with a disinformationalist, such as email, DELAY IS CALLED FOR – there will usually be a minimum of a 48-72 hour delay. This allows a sit-down team discussion on response strategy for best effect, and even enough time to ‘get permission’ or instruction from a formal chain of command.
  
  

• In the NG example 1) above, it will often ALSO be seen that bigger guns are drawn and fired after the same 48-72 hours delay – the team approach in play. This is especially true when the targeted truth seeker or their comments are considered more important with respect to potential to reveal truth. Thus, a serious truth sayer will be attacked twice for the same sin.

Remarkably, even media and law enforcement have NOT BEEN TRAINED to deal with these issues. For the most part, only the players themselves understand the rules of the game.

Marco Torres is a research specialist, writer and consumer advocate for healthy lifestyles. He holds degrees in Public Health and Environmental Science and is a professional speaker on topics such as disease prevention, environmental toxins and health policy.

• Incrementalism: Breaking Free From World Powers Who Gradually Destroy Our Health

• The Resistance Mounts

Reference Sources 89, 152, 170, 183, 260
August 10, 2010

Source: http://preventdisease.com/news/10//081010_everything_is_a_lie.shtml

NANA’S COMMENTARY:

This story creates a shift in our self pitying paradigm and shakes us to the reality that we must not tarry to long. We must move outside of our mono-focused “all about me” world and “reach out and touch somebody’s” hand.

It may sound weird but that’s what this story did for me. It broke my focus on my own worries and pushed me to send “Healing Love & Light” vibrations to this family. Life & Death are both equally strong aspects of the experiential soul, however, it is how we engage the lessons and challenges that define our relationship to “Source”, “All In All”, “Creation” or whatever you want to call “God”.

The journey of life is filled with many twists & turns, ups and downs. Sometimes another’s sorrow, another’s loss is a wake-up call for others. Sometimes, as we sit bemoaning our individual fate; stressing about how to get out of a particular situation and grieving over our own losses; something like this happens and it seems to jolt us out of our own misery to acknowledge another’s sorrow. We are given a moment in which we can release our own sorrow and turn our attention and support to another.

Instinctively, we run towards another offering them compassion. This is healing. This is true concern for our fellow human being. This is true Love. Like a smack in the face, it wakes us up to the bigger issues we  must confront living on this planet. If this smack can move us outside of our own mono-focused realities; then maybe we could spread that around to all those who suffer on this planet. Maybe we can be more pro-active in being gentler, more caring, more conscientious and less willing to allow senseless aggression/violence against our planet and the life-forms that inhabit it.

As living soul beings, we are teachers and students on the path of life.  

Mother’s Worst Nightmare: Sons Killed on the Way to Graduation Ceremony as She Waits in the Audience

SOURCE

June 13, 2013 | Filed under: BizTechNews | Posted by: Yolanda

By Yolanda Spivey
WINDSOR, NC- A mother’s worst nightmare came into fruition as she sat in the audience of her 17 year old son’s graduation only to be pulled away from the ceremony to hear devastating news.  Her two sons, 17 year old Deonta and 24 year old Anthony had been in a fatal car accident on their way to the ceremony.
Sandra Williams McGlone, and a host of other family members, were waiting to see her son Deonta Whitaker walk across the stage at his Bertie High School graduation to get his diploma, but instead she was told of the tragedy.
“I just can’t describe it.  It’s unbelievable.  It’s like it’s a dream that I want to wake up from,” said Williams-McGlone.
The family is devastated by this tragic news. Deonta’s aunt, Tamare Cherry told WBTW News 13, “This is such a difficult time for us.  It was just devastating.  Our minds were all over the place.”
Highway Patrol troopers said that the older brother Anthony was driving the younger brother Deonta to the high school graduation ceremony when he lost control of his vehicle and crashed into trees on the road they were traveling.  It is suspected that both young men died on impact.
The mother, Williams-McGlone stated that Deonta was headed to Elizabeth City State University and he was a scholar.  He received numerous scholarships to attend the University.  The oldest son Anthony was a graduate of Bertie County High School and was employed by UTI Global Logistic as a Technician. He leaves behind a 3 year old daughter.
Deonta’s best friend accepted his high school diploma on behalf of Deonta and his family.
The brother’s funerals will be held at the very same high school they were headed to.  They will be laid to rest in Ahoskie, N.C.    

MoveOn.org

May 26, 2013
KNOW YOUR HISTORY: Memorial Day was started by former slaves on May, 1, 1865 in Charleston, SC to honor 257 dead Union Soldiers who had been buried in a mass grave in a Confederate prison camp. They dug up the bodies and worked for 2 weeks to give them a proper burial as gratitude for fighting for their freedom. They then held a parade of 10,000 people led by 2,800 Black children where they marched, sang and celebrated.Thanks to Abstrakt Goldsmith for this nugget of history that most of us never learned in school.

To this, I say, why do we fight?? What is it about human nature that makes them believe that they must kill other human beings for their freedom?

The Glory of war is not glorious. Ask those who do fight. The first casualty of war is “Truth”. People are trained, brainwashed and distorted to believe that their leaders who do this to them would not lie to them, would not line their pockets with blood money and would care for them upon their return from the Battlefield.

All to often we see our fellow human beings become inhuman in their acts of warring against other human beings. And then they return home and are given ribbons, ribbons that honor how heroically they “killed” another human being for our “freedom”? The depth of the absurdity and cognitive dissonance is overwhelming. How does creating a war culture, a militarized environment, a police state, a surveillance state a cult of oppression of other human beings, give us freedom?

Our troops have their humanity removed from them as they are trained to believe that killing for freedom is tantamount to Patriotism. Patriotism is tantamount to all previously perceived values and standards. To be Patriotic means to stand by your government, even if it is found to be lying and creating scenarios in which you must risk your life and kill others, conquer others and invade others to maintain your freedom at home. The stalk reality that this aggression breeds more aggression and diminishes humanity to a banal state to me is the result of mass graves and disregard of the humanity of others.

This is not a political, racial, ethnic, national problem, it is a human problem, and it is the human being who continually takes the freedom and sovereignty of other humans in their so-called quest for “freedom” at home. An aerial view of this idiocy could cause humanity to stop and think, what is the purpose of this? Who profits? And more importantly, what is this doing to our basic humanity?  Is it really about defense or is it really about DOMINANCE?

Links and Commentary:There appears to be many variations on this theme and a bit of a debate as to who started what and when. The links below will show the differences in the history and opinions on this.  I think that this story shows the true horrors of war, something that would have been denied or ignored not because the Freedmen acknowledged the fallen soldiers but because of the way those fallen soldiers were treated on American soil.

From Dalp Pearson
Here is a tid-bit of back story on this photograph — Union Cemetery

During the closing days of the Civil War, the area was used as a prisoner-of-war camp. More than two hundred Union soldiers died in the camp and were buried in a mass grave at the site.

Union soldiers were buried behind the old racetrack’s stands near the present intersection of Tenth Ave. and Mary Murray Drive.
In an article titled “The First Decoration Day”, David W. Blight of Yale has written:[3]

“The city was largely abandoned by white residents by late February. Among the first troops to enter and march up Meeting Street singing liberation songs was the 21st U. S. Colored Infantry; their commander accepted the formal surrender of the city.

“Thousands of black Charlestonians, most former slaves, remained in the city and conducted a series of commemorations to declare their sense of the meaning of the war. The largest of these events, and unknown until some extraordinary luck in my recent research, took place on May 1, 1865. During the final year of the war, the Confederates had converted the planters’ horse track, the Washington Race Course and Jockey Club, into an outdoor prison. Union soldiers were kept in horrible conditions in the interior of the track; at least 257 died of exposure and disease and were hastily buried in a mass grave behind the grandstand. Some twenty-eight black workmen went to the site, re-buried the Union dead properly, and built a high fence around the cemetery. They whitewashed the fence and built an archway over an entrance on which they inscribed the words, ‘Martyrs of the Race Course’.

“Then, black Charlestonians in cooperation with white missionaries and teachers, staged an unforgettable parade of 10,000 people on the slaveholders’ race course. The symbolic power of the low-country planter aristocracy’s horse track (where they had displayed their wealth, leisure, and influence) was not lost on the freedpeople. A New York Tribune correspondent witnessed the event, describing ‘a procession of friends and mourners as South Carolina and the United States never saw before.’

“At 9 am on May 1, the procession stepped off led by three thousand black schoolchildren carrying arm loads of roses and singing ‘John Brown’s Body.’ The children were followed by several hundred black women with baskets of flowers, wreaths and crosses. Then came black men marching in cadence, followed by contingents of Union infantry and other black and white citizens. As many as possible gathering in the cemetery enclosure; a childrens’ choir sang ‘We’ll Rally around the Flag,’ the ‘Star-Spangled Banner,’ and several spirituals before several black ministers read from scripture. No record survives of which biblical passages rung out in the warm spring air, but the spirit of Leviticus 25 was surely present at those burial rites: ‘for it is the jubilee; it shall be holy unto you … in the year of this jubilee he shall return every man unto his own possession.’

“Following the solemn dedication the crowd dispersed into the infield and did what many of us do on Memorial Day: they enjoyed picnics, listened to speeches, and watched soldiers drill. Among the full brigade of Union infantry participating was the famous 54th Massachusetts and the 34th and 104th U.S. Colored Troops, who performed a special double-columned march around the gravesite. The war was over, and Decoration Day had been founded by African Americans in a ritual of remembrance and consecration. The war, they had boldly announced, had been all about the triumph of their emancipation over a slaveholders’ republic, and not about state rights, defense of home, nor merely soldiers’ valor and sacrifice.”

By late April 1865, a white picket fence on which was written “The Martyrs of the Race Course” had been erected.[4] On May 1, 1865, thousands of people, mainly newly freed blacks, processed to the site, and members of the 54th Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry marched around the site. The graves were decorated, speeches were offered, and celebrants enjoyed picnics in the area.[5] This has been cited as the first Memorial Day celebration. By 1871, the cemetery was suffering neglect, and the soldiers were reinterred at the Beaufort[3] and Florence National Cemeteries.

http://m.video.pbs.org/video/2318014363/


Watch Memorial Day on PBS. See more from American Experience.



   
” In the May 1865, the newspaper covered what Blight argues should be credited as the nation’s first memorial day observance, held on May 1, 1865. At that time, Charleston was largely in ruins and families were eager to rebuild their lives and their city. The photos on this page are Library of Congress images from the era. Two simply show scenes of wartime devastation in the city. But the photo at right here appears to show the land where the former Confederate prison camp stood (also the site of a pre-Civil War Race Course). The photo appears to show work beginning on raising the remains in April 1865 in preparation for the new cemetery that eventually would include a wall, an archway entrance and properly buried remains.
    The Daily Courier coverage of that first memorial day, May 1, 1865, was headlined …
The Martyrs of the Race Course”http://www.readthespirit.com/explore/the-first-memorial-day-may-1-1865-reported-in-the-charleston/ 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/jim-downs/who-invented-memorial-day_b_3340146.html
http://www.usmemorialday.org/backgrnd.html
http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20090524/PC1602/305249938
http://www.waterloony.com/mdayhistory.html
http://video.pbs.org/video/2318014363/
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/28/opinion/28mon4.html?_r=1&
http://jobs.blacknews.com/content/232372/blog.cgi?cid&reading=1

http://www.usmemorialday.org/backgrnd.html
http://www.va.gov/opa/speceven/memday/history.asp
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1900454,00.html
http://www.blackbluedog.com/2013/05/news/did-you-know-memorial-day-was-started-by-ex-slaves/
http://blackhistory.com/content/232359/the-first-memorial-day-10-000-march-in-charleston-many-former-slaves-to-celebrate-freedom

From: Navneet Gupta
“The greatest purveyor of violence in the world is my own government, I cannot be silent”

“A nation that year after year continues to spend more money on military defense than on social uplift is approaching spiritual death”

“We have guided missiles, yet misguided men.”

– Martin Luther King, Jr.(1929 – 1968)

Militarism is glorified in the west. We are asked to “remember” the fallen, yet keep fighting in these same unjust conflicts at the same time (many of which we are responsible for starting). It makes no sense?

The U.S. is one of only two countries which has not ratified the convention regarding the use of child soldiers. They are also the largest arms dealers in the world (here is our WMD).

War is all about greed, power, and exploiting the powerless. War has nothing to do with freedom, loving your country, or being a hero. War is about killing innocent people, stealing what they have and keeping power over them through violence & propaganda.

A FRACTION of the money spent on the military industrial complex could eradicate hunger (Food, Not Bombs!), and all other social and ecological problems humanity faces (saving lives instead of taking them).

‘Developed’ nations along with their corporate raiders prop up a corrupt elite at the top of poor nations through the selling of arms, funding, ‘development’, loans, etc. This has allowed for the extraction of indigenous wealth from the southern hemisphere to the northern hemisphere (Often referred to as ‘Neocolonialism’)

Was gonna share this video on Facebook, but I think not. How is it that “Sept. 11, 2001 Osama bin Laden used expert CIA training to murder 3000 people?” Has this been proven? Last on this, those so-called terrorist couldn’t fly a plane straight, much less maneuver 1 into the towers 2x’s& avoid detection as it careened into the Pentagon. Michael Moore at best gives facts & at worst, throws a dis-info tidbit just to see if you are paying attention. Not cool, so what part do you believe? Dis-info discredits.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbjr_cPS9_A

 
But I feel that the training should be done with the parents first, not the children. What happens in a lot of cases is that children are exposed to things that their parents are not aware of or would not expose them to or in some other cases do not want the children to even talk about.
This issue is two-pronged.
1. While they claim to empower the children they are dis-empowering the parents and placing themselves in the position of authority over the children beyond their parents.
2. If there is sexual impropriety on any level, be it parents, teachers, staff or others, who will come forth and expose this? If the children are given the proper training it must include the whole family to be most healthy and forthright for all involved.
I had an interesting dream, and I think it came from this topic.
I was an educator, somewhere, and it was not my present self but a teacher nevertheless attempting to handle this situation in my small school with my children. Their ages were in this range, and the demographics were across the board. The children responded all quite differently to “Sex Education” and it varied according to their home environment. One young man, about 9-10 years of age, he was African American, a little heavy and a little tall for his age. He became hysterical, and began to scream and ran out of the room. We had to calm him down and every time we attempted to bring him back into the room, he would yell and scream hysterically.(Clearly, he was not comfortable at all with the idea of discussing this in his classroom. He may have felt that school was his sage environment and now that safety was threatened because this was being discussed in the classroom. Apparently, he had been treated inappropriately and he was having a severe reaction.)
There were other students who considered it playful, they began to play around laughing and giggling. (Clearly, there was something missed in the instructions as they were not taking this as seriously as we had envisioned.)
Then there was another young lady and young man who were a bit older, maybe late teens. It seems there was an attraction already there between them, and they began to mimic having sew, right there in the classroom. When they were told that the lesson was over, the young man, having become fully aroused refused to stop and quickly turned the young girl over and penetrated her anus. She screamed and we had to pull him off her. It was unbelievable but he said, you can’t bring me this far and then tell me now it’s time to stop.
Okay, this was a dream, and I think that it is showing me the dangers of this approach if not properly handled. If you have people with nefarious motives doing this, well, they are not going to think of all the angles that can cause this to be a hurtful experience for some, traumatic for others and the usurpation of the parents’ authority and/or responsibility to be the first educators of this and so many other topics for their children. If parents allows the PTB to determine hand over fist, what is best for their children, then the society is controlled by those who are less interested in the genuine welfare of the children and more interested in their own agendas.
We simply must take control of our lives back and bring it home into our family situations and only if there is no other recourse,, rely on outside institutions to determine what is best for us.
In this day and age, we have become so dependent on the society and its programs to take care of us and our needs, we have forgotten or have gotten lazy about doing this ourselves. We have in essence become slaves to the MACHINE/MATRIX/POWERS THAT BE.

_____________________________________________________________________________



U.N. Report Advocates Teaching Masturbation to 5-Year-Olds
Like us? www.facebook.com/Citizens.Action.Network

The United Nations is recommending that children as young as five receive mandatory sexual education that would teach even pre-kindergarteners about masturbation and topics like gender violence.

The U.N.’s Economic, Social and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) released a 98-page report in June offering a universal lesson plan for kids ranging in age from 5-18, an
“informed approach to effective sex, relationships” and HIV education that they say is essential for “all young people.”

The U.N. insists the program is “age appropriate,” but critics say it’s exposing kids to sex far too early, and offers up abstract ideas — like “transphobia” — they might not even understand.

“At that age they should be learning about … the proper name of certain parts of their bodies,” said Michelle Turner, president of Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum, “certainly not about masturbation.”

Turner was disturbed by UNESCO’s plans to explain to children as young as nine about the safety of legal abortions, and to advocate and “promote the right to and access to safe abortion” for everyone over the age of 15.

“This is absurd,” she told FOXNews.com.

The UNESCO report, called “International Guidelines for Sexuality Education,” separates children into four age groups: 5-to-8-year-olds, 9-to-12-year-olds, 12-to-15-year-olds and 15-to-18-year-olds.

Under the U.N.’s voluntary sex-ed regime, kids just 5-8 years old will be told that “touching and rubbing one’s genitals is called masturbation” and that private parts “can feel pleasurable when touched by oneself.”

• Click here to see the report.
http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/082509_unesco.pdf

By the time they’re 9 years old, they’ll learn about “positive and negative effects of ‘aphrodisiacs,” and wrestle with the ideas of “homophobia, transphobia and abuse of power.”

At 12, they’ll learn the “reasons for” abortions — but they’ll already have known about their safety for three years. When they’re 15, they’ll be exposed to direct “advocacy to promote the right to and access to safe abortion.”

Child health experts say they are wary of teaching about the sticky topic of abortion, but stress that as long as messages stay age-appropriate, educating kids at a younger age helps better steer them into adulthood.

“The adults are more leery of [early sex-ed] than the kids are,” said Dr. Jennifer Hartstein, a child psychiatrist in New York. “Our own fears sometimes prevent us from being as open and honest with our kids as possible.”

Hartstein, however, who didn’t see much harm in explaining basic concepts that kids of all ages will have questions about, was baffled by some of the ideas the U.N. hoped to introduce to kids as young as 5 years old, who will be taught about “gender roles, stereotypes and gender-based violence.”

“I want to know how you teach that to a 5-year-old,” Hartstein told FOXNews.com.

Despite those challenges, the U.N. insists that “in a world affected by HIV and AIDS … there is an imperative to give children and young people the knowledge, skills and values to understand and make informed decisions.”

UNESCO officials said the guidelines were “co-authored by two leading experts in the field of sexuality education” — Dr. Doug Kirby, an adolescent sexuality expert, and Nanette Ecker, the former director of international education and training at the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States.

Their report was based on a “rigorous review” of sex-ed literature, “drawing upon 87 studies from around the world,” said Mark Richmond, director of UNESCO’s Division for the Coordination of U.N. Priorities in Education, in an e-mailed statement.

Richmond defended teaching about masturbation as “age-appropriate” because even in early childhood, “children are known to be curious about their bodies.” Their lessons, he added, would hopefully help kids “develop a more complex understanding of sexual behaviour” as they grow into adults.

But Michelle Turner, of Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum, said that such roles should be left up to parents, and worried that children were being exposed to too much information too soon.

“Why can’t kids be kids anymore?” she said.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,543203,00.html#ixzz2Pr0y5WQw

Watch Out…We’re Surrounded!

legalienate.blogspot.com/2013/03/watch-outwere-surrounded.html

After the tenth anniversary of the destruction of Iraq passed with the usual historic distortion and pieties from established power about the waste and rationalizations about why we had to do it, America’s bipartisan war party has even more loudly revived the same lies and logic perversion used to get support for that slaughter. Without even a hint of embarrassment, political puppets of wealth from congress to the state department to the white house are again talking about gas and chemical weapons of mass destruction, substituting Assad of Syria for Hussein of Iraq as this season’s demonic Hitler-figure to lull Americans into accepting further military crimes to perpetuate finance capital’s empire and keep our minds off the fact that it threatens to collapse on our heads.

Media fulfills its responsibility as corporate stenographer to power by reporting these charges, without a blushing reminder that this is the same puppet-speak that was only called by its rightful name after hundreds of thousands were dead, an educated class had become refugees and a materially developed secular nation had been broken up into a scattering of underdeveloped sectarian neighborhoods. This process was repeated in Libya but without invasion and simply by using NATO servants to front for our mass bombings. That assault on morality and reason included the usual charges of genocide – when anyone dies in a foreign country our rulers don’t like, it’s called genocide – and new descent into the sewers of western consciousness with tales of mass rapes committed by monsters given Viagra by the evil dictator. Though not accepted by any but the most tortured minds – our leaders – these tales from the toilets of degeneracy helped reduce another nation developed along lines not totally in keeping with the desires of the Master-Race-Chosen-People deities of the west. Libya was transformed into a shattered place with freedom for high finance and oil companies and near chaos for almost everyone else. The latest atrocities in Syria seem to indicate that while the imperial cabal dominated by the MRCP minority of multi-billionaires and their servants flounders in deadly crisis, it’s intention is not only to maintain the diseased system but spread its affliction until the entire global population joins the terminal patients in the universal intensive care ward that is being created by global capitalism.

The banking crisis that began in the USA and spread to Europe has brought near total destruction of the social democratic policies that had previously saved capitalism. The economic cancer that gripped the world in the 1930s was placed in remission for more than a generation by the relatively enlightened – for capital – policies called Keynesianism. These created government spending to prop up anarchic markets that were collapsing under exclusive minority control. It wisely – for capital – used tax money to create jobs, food, clothing and shelter for great masses of people, so that they might not only refrain from revolting against minority power, but also consume all the goods and services they created in order to profit that minority.

The material improvement in the lives of many – though far from most – enabled a generation of relative peaceful control for great wealth in the west, even while the world was consumed by more wars that killed more millions, forgotten because unlike the Euros who perished in wars one and two, these were mostly from the darker skinned members of our race, the third world majority. They were and remain either colonized, neo-colonized or otherwise economically subjugated and thus remaining invisible to newly created middle classes subjected to mind numbing consciousness control and mind managing entertainment that often passes for news on TV. This newly affluent class – by peasant standards – consumed billions of dollars of mostly needless garbage advertised into being absolutely necessary-for-survival drugs, cosmetics, therapies, toys, pets, gadgets and processed foods, while financing with its tax dollars and plastic debt a massive version of fake democracy and a far more massive supply of real weapons of mass destruction.

Already badly overstretched and financed only by imaginary electronic funds backed by very real military power, imperial dictatorship is creating new problems to bolster its war state while simultaneously destroying a civil society hardly conceived by moral values but nonetheless preventing complete physical breakdown. While so-called “austerity” is employed to cut government spending – the only thing that has maintained MRCP capitalism for a generation – while at the same time attempting to militarily protect finance from any and all national models daring to attempt going a different way finds more warfare threatened, with these idiotic fantasy charges to make the public accepting of the need to cut back on their meals in order to buy more guns.

As this is written and the arms shipments to Syria increase along with the death toll and lies, the hallucinatory threat from North Korea gets headlines. This tiny nation once invaded and bombed by the USA and suffering death and destruction unknown to intellectually impoverished Americans, is said to be threatening the USA with bellicose statements. The fact that the USA has troops on its borders and regularly conducts what criminally infantile elements here call “war games” on Korean seas play no role at all in North Korea’s posture, of course. The only thing that may help them, and it is a big maybe, is that North Korea does possess nuclear weapons and could wreak terrible retaliatory havoc if the warhead in our half white house decides to go totally over the edge and attack them.

Meanwhile, the financial crisis has reached new lows in Europe, especially Cyprus where the bailout not only involves robbing taxpayers but stealing money from their bank accounts. Those in America who think this is a laughable situation might start removing their money from these corporate casinos and placing then under the mattress the way their grandparents did. Of course, authority may ultimately attempt confiscation of those mattresses so maybe the second amendment gun lobby fundamentalists have an argument approaching reason? No, but given present conditions, any crackpot theory will get some hearing. Unfortunately, the most crackpot of all, from capital central in the USA, is getting far too much.

Posted by Frank Scottat 12:22 PM