The Game Politicians Play

The Game Politicians Play | KLEPTOCRACY-The-Game | Government Control Politics Sleuth Journal

The career political class is the quintessential predatory clique. If you remember and understand any aspect about politics, let it be the nature of the people who devote their lives to a band of thieves. Forget about the seeming dissimilarities in ideology, the political culture maintains a common conduct. Ignore the rhetoric that resembles opposing viewpoints, the club of controllers protects each other. And if you ever believed in heroes and are still waiting for a savior, your disappointment will eventually turn into despair. What sustains the process of government are the deception of its vice and the refusal of the public to admit that the game never changes.

The charlatans that are attracted to it become players in this adventure of egotism and are filled with enough vanity to pay off the federal debt. The sheer idea that a lifetime devoted to national service is a noble pursuit corrupts the body politic and perverts anyone who dreams of change, while yearning for public adoration.  Examine the results of the scam that grows out of the mindset that avows – we are from the government and we are here to help you . . .

Politicians who seek elected office are driven by the allure of power. Some may campaign on a platform of helping the people, while most scheme to grow the agencies and scope of the State. Those who have romantic dreams of reform in the beginning will mutate into guardians of the system that feeds the delusion that they make a difference. These fakes deceive themselves that good comes out of their legislation and that society improves with every program. They are frauds because their primary device is deceit. And they are cowards because they do not dare reveal their true motivations. The public would never understand, they have become irreplaceable!

What elected politician devotes their efforts to defending individual Liberty? Passing a federal law to impose compliance in order to free people is preposterous. But that is the principal focus of legislation. The government will compel liberation under the rules that suit the political class. The reasoning that the top down knows best permeates the execution of control. When a dubious authority is enacted to empower a bureaucracy, the plan of mutual dependence is fostered. Symbiosis produces the appearance of periodic friction, but the reciprocity that is shared between the lawmaker and the bureaucrat is rooted in correspondent interest.

This is the reason why cover-ups become the norm. Factions that naturally vie for dominance will close ranks, when the vile organism is threatened. The common bond of alliance supersedes any internal differences. The decisive criminal syndicate is the ultimate gravy train. Coerced and binding taxes, which steal from the wealth creators and enhance the efficacy of the thieves, who demand even more tribute, is the real constitution that defines the STATE. Enforcement and regulation is the aim of the bureaucrat as is the source of their own influence. Don’t be hoodwinked into thinking there is a difference between the elected politician and the commissar.

Again just examine the record! Retirement from office or losing an election is rewarded with capacious pensions. Those skillful in developing their nefarious talents or fortuitous in gathering derogatory dirt will extort their usefulness into a cabinet position. For those not so gifted, lobbying additional legislation, bribing the regulator or a simple cajole for a chum – becomes the full time occupation for the former office holder. Once an addictive infatuation, a venture into Washington DC turns into an enduring Beltway obsession, and a permanent sentence of enslavement for the people.

Is this the kind of public service that benefits the citizen? This formula for organizing society and maintaining basic civic order is a ruse. The politician as a professional is ludicrous. A continual career on the public dole is incompatible with good government. A shift from congressman to a lobbyist doesn’t return one to the private sector, but just perpetrates and promotes the pernicious union of State/Capitalism. If you think this is a harsh assessment, explain how so many politicians and bureaucrats become rich while on the public payroll? Do you really think that their accumulation of financial rewards is confined to their salaries? Speaking gigs are payola and book deals are payoffs. Appointments to NGO’s – non government organizations – think tanks and quasi public institutions are the charity of easy compensation for serving the elite culture.

This revolving door always slams shut in our faces, but most of the public is oblivious to the sting. They are more consumed with the perceived gains they can extract from the system. This attitude of apathy in accountability for the entire political class is one of the main causes of the nation’s demise. We all know that politicians get away with murder, so why sweat the small stuff! As long as I get my government check, those free services and expanded programs isn’t that the purpose of the general welfare? So goes the rationale of the masses, following the exact plan of the political class.

This game has no amusement value. Its only entertainment is for the enjoyment of the career politician. Their pleasure should not be our anguish. Their pastime need not be our pain. Our future should be one that promotes hope. This dreadful game needs to end. A proper ethos of true public service must be restored in order to achieve a national purpose – the Liberty of each individual citizen . . .

People constantly speak of “the government” doing this or that, as they might speak of God doing it. But the government is really nothing but a group of men, and usually they are very inferior men. They may have some better man working for them, but they themselves are seldom worthy of any respect. – H.L. Mencken

The post The Game Politicians Play appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Can Wheat Drive More Than Your Digestive System Crazy?

Can Wheat Drive More Than Your Digestive System Crazy? | your-brain-on-gluten | General Health Sleuth Journal Special Interests

Wheat could be driving more than your digestive system crazy.

While wheat is well known to wreak havoc on the gastrointestinal health of genetically susceptible folks, such as those with celiac disease, and more recently, irritable bowel syndrome, new research published in the journal Psychiatry Research indicates that sensitivity to one of the components in wheat known as gliadin could be driving some into states of acute mania:

“The relationship of the antibodies to the clinical course of mania was analyzed by the use of regression models. Individuals with mania had significantly increased levels of IgG antibodies to gliadin, but not other markers of celiac disease, at baseline compared with controls in multivariate analyses.”

“Among the individuals with mania, elevated levels at follow-up were significantly associated with re-hospitalization in the six month follow-up period.”1

While correlation does not equal causation, it is interesting to note that there is already robust supportive research on the link between wheat consumption and schizophrenia. Seven such studies can be viewed on our open source wheat database, for those inclined to explore this connection further. You will also find listed there over a dozen neurological conditions linked to wheat consumption.

For an additional explanation for why wheat may exhibit neurotoxic, if not also psychotropic properties, the excerpts from our essay series The Dark Side of Wheat are provided to shed light on the topic:

Gliadin can be broken down into various amino acid lengths or peptides. Gliadorphin is a 7 amino acid long peptide: Tyr-Pro-Gln-Pro-Gln-Pro-Phe which forms when the gastrointestinal system is compromised. When digestive enzymes are insufficient to break gliadorphin down into 2-3 amino acid lengths and a compromised intestinal wall allows for the leakage of the entire 7 amino acid long fragment into the blood, glaidorphin can pass through to the brain through circumventricular organs and activate opioid receptors resulting in disrupted brain function.

There have been a number of gluten exorphins identified: gluten exorphin A4, A5, B4, B5 and C, and many of them have been hypothesized to play a role in autism, schizophrenia, ADHD and related neurological conditions.   In the same way that the celiac iceberg illustrated the illusion that intolerance to wheat is rare, it is possible, even probable, that wheat exerts pharmacological influences on everyone. What distinguishes the schizophrenic or autistic individual from the functional wheat consumer is the degree to which they are affected.

Below the tip of the “Gluten Iceberg,” we might find these opiate-like peptides to be responsible for bread’s general popularity as a “comfort food”, and our use of phrases like “I love bread,” or “this bread is to die for” to be indicative of wheat’s narcotic properties. I believe a strong argument can be made that the agricultural revolution that occurred approximately 10-12,000 years ago as we shifted from the Paleolithic into the Neolithic era was precipitated as much by environmental necessities and human ingenuity, as it was by the addictive qualities of psychoactive peptides in the grains themselves.

The world-historical reorganization of society, culture and consciousness accomplished through the symbiotic relationship with cereal grasses, may have had as much to do with our ability to master agriculture, as to be mastered by it.   The presence of pharmacologically active peptides would have further sweetened the deal, making it hard to distance ourselves from what became a global fascination with wheat.

An interesting example of wheat’s addictive potential pertains to the Roman army. The Roman Empire was once known as the “Wheat Empire,” with soldiers being paid in wheat rations. Rome’s entire war machine, and its vast expansion, was predicated on the availability of wheat. Forts were actually granaries, holding up to a year’s worth of grain in order to endure sieges from their enemies. Historians describe soldiers’ punishment included being deprived of wheat rations and being given barley instead.   The Roman Empire went on to facilitate the global dissemination of wheat cultivation which fostered a form of imperialism with biological as well as cultural roots.

The Roman appreciation for wheat, like our own, may have had less to do with its nutritional value as “health food” than its ability to generate a unique narcotic reaction. It may fulfill our hunger while generating a repetitive, ceaseless cycle of craving more of the same, and by doing so, enabling the surreptitious control of human behavior. Other researchers have come to similar conclusions. According to the biologists Greg Wadley & Angus Martin:

“Cereals have important qualities that differentiate them from most other drugs. They are a food source as well as a drug, and can be stored and transported easily. They are ingested in frequent small doses (not occasional large ones), and do not impede work performance in most people. A desire for the drug, even cravings or withdrawal, can be confused with hunger. These features make cereals the ideal facilitator of civilization (and may also have contributed to the long delay in recognizing their pharmacological properties).”

WHEAT PEPTIDES EXHIBIT MOLECULAR MIMICRY

Gliadorphin and gluten exporphins exhibit a form of molecular mimicry that affects the nervous system, but other wheat proteins effect different organ systems. The digestion of gliadin produces a peptide that is 33 amino acids long and is known as 33-mer which has a remarkable homology to the internal sequence of pertactin, the immunodominant sequence in the Bordetella pertussis bacteria (whooping cough). Pertactin is considered a highly immunogenic virulence factor, and is used in vaccines to amplify the adaptive immune response. It is possible the immune system may confuse this 33-mer with a pathogen resulting in either or both a cell-mediated and adaptive immune response against Self.

WHEAT CONTAINS HIGH LEVELS OF EXCITO-TOXINS

John B. Symes, D.V.M. is responsible for drawing attention to the potential excitotoxicity of wheat, dairy, and soy, due to their exceptionally high levels of the non-essential amino acids glutamic and aspartic acid. Excitotoxicity is a pathological process where glutamic and aspartic acid cause an over-activation of the nerve cell receptors (e.g. NMDA and AMPA receptor) leading to calcium induced nerve and brain injury.   Of all cereal grasses commonly consumed wheat contains the highest levels of glutamic acid and aspartic acid. Glutamic acid is largely responsible for wheat’s exceptional taste. The Japanese coined the word umami to describe the extraordinary “yummy” effect that glutamic acid exerts on the tongue and palate, and invented monosodium glutamate (MSG) to amplify this sensation. Though the Japanese first synthesized MSG from kelp, wheat can also be used due to its high glutamic acid content.   It is likely that wheat’s popularity, alongside its opiate-like activity, has everything to do with the natural flavor-enhancers already contained within it. These amino acids may contribute to neurodegenerative conditions such as multiple sclerosis, Alzhemier disease, Huntington’s disease, and other nervous disorders such as epilepsy, attention deficit disorder and migraines.

1 Markers of gluten sensitivity in acute mania: A longitudinal study.  Psychiatry Res. 2012 Mar 2. Epub 2012 Mar 2. PMID: 22386570

For Additional Research Visit Our Wheat & Gluten Education Center

A critically acclaimed internet classic, The Dark Side of Wheat is now available to own as a downloadable document exclusively from GreenMedInfo.com. It includes two hard-hitting essays that represent a change in the way wheat intolerance is comprehended; no longer a rare, strictly genetically-based disease, wheat is revealed to be a species-specific intolerance, whose role in health and disease has been greatly misunderstood since ancient times. The downloadable document also includes a 90-page quick reference guide containing hyperlinks to research on the National Library of Medicine on over 120 diseases that have been linked to wheat consumption.

The Dark Side of Wheat has changed many minds about the exalted status of wheat among secular and sacred institutions alike.

As Dr. Ron Hoggan, co-author of “Dangerous Grains” puts it in the foreword: “Sir Isaac Newton’s famous metaphor (perhaps quoting others) said something to the effect that we see further, not because of any special endowment of our own, but because we are standing on the shoulders of giants. After reading Sayer’s work on wheat, I felt as if I had just been boosted to a higher plane from which I could see and understand much, much more. Sayer’s insights continue to shape and inform much of my effort to understand the various impacts of grains on human health.”

© June 26, 2017 GreenMedInfo LLC. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of GreenMedInfo LLC. Want to learn more from GreenMedInfo? Sign up for the newsletter here http://www.greenmedinfo.com/greenmed/newsletter.


Subscribe to The Sleuth Journal Newsletter for Daily Articles!


The post Can Wheat Drive More Than Your Digestive System Crazy? appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Execution by Firing Squad: The Militarized Police State Opens Fire

 Execution by Firing Squad: The Militarized Police State Opens Fire | militarized-police | Sleuth Journal Special Interests Tyranny & Police State US News

By: John W. Whitehead, The Rutherford Institute | 

“It is often the case that police shootings, incidents where law enforcement officers pull the trigger on civilians, are left out of the conversation on gun violence. But a police officer shooting a civilian counts as gun violence. Every time an officer uses a gun against an innocent or an unarmed person contributes to the culture of gun violence in this country.”—Journalist Celisa Calacal

Legally owning a gun in America could get you killed by a government agent.

While it still technically remains legal to own a firearm in America, possessing one can now get you pulled over, searched, arrested, subjected to all manner of surveillance, treated as a suspect without ever having committed a crime, shot at and killed.

This same rule does not apply to government agents, however, who are armed to the hilt and rarely given more than a slap on the wrists for using their weapons to shoot and kill American citizens.

According to the Washington Post, “1 in 13 people killed by guns are killed by police.”

Just recently, for example, a Minnesota jury acquitted a police officer who shot and killed 32-year-old Philando Castile, a school cafeteria supervisor, during a routine traffic stop merely because Castile disclosed that he had a gun in his possession, for which he had a lawful conceal-and-carry permit. That’s all it took for police to shoot Castile four times as he was reaching for his license and registration. Castile’s girlfriend and her 4-year-old daughter witnessed the entire exchange.

Earlier this year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ruled that Florida police will not be held accountable for banging on the wrong door at 1:30 am, failing to identify themselves as police, and then repeatedly shooting and killing the innocent homeowner who answered the door while holding a gun in self-defense. Although 26-year-old Andrew Scott had committed no crime and never fired a single bullet or lifted his firearm against police, he was gunned down by police who were investigating a speeding incident by engaging in a middle-of-the-night “knock and talk” in Scott’s apartment complex.

As attorney David French writes for the National Review, “Shooting an innocent man in his own home because he grabs a gun when an unidentified person pounds on his door or barges through it isn’t just an ‘unreasonable search or seizure.’ It’s a direct violation of his clearly established right to keep and bear arms.”

Continuing its own disturbing trend of siding with police in cases of excessive use of force, a unanimous United States Supreme Court recently acquitted police who recklessly fired 15 times into a backyard shack in which a homeless couple—Angel and Jennifer Mendez—was sheltering. Angel Mendez suffered numerous gunshot wounds, one of which required the amputation of his right leg below the knee, and his wife Jennifer was shot in the back. Incredibly, the Court ruled that the Los Angeles County police officers’ use of force against the homeless couple was justified as a defensive action, because Angel was allegedly seen holding a BB gun that he used for shooting rats.

In yet another case, a Texas homeowner was subjected to a no-knock, SWAT-team style forceful entry and raid based solely on the suspicion that there were legally-owned firearms in his household. Making matters worse, police panicked and opened fire through a solid wood door on the homeowner, who had already gone to bed.

In Maryland, a Florida man traveling through the state with his wife and kids was stopped by a police officer and interrogated about the whereabouts of his registered handgun. Despite the man’s insistence that the handgun had been left at home, the officer spent nearly two hours searching through the couple’s car, patting them down along with their children, and having them sit in the back of a patrol car. No weapon was found.

In Philadelphia, a 25-year-old man was confronted by police, verbally threatened and arrested for carrying a gun in public, which is legal within the city. When Mark Fiorino attempted to explain his rights under the law to police, police ordered him to get on his knees or else “I am gonna shoot ya.” Fiorino was later released without charges.

What these cases add up to is a new paradigm in which legally owning a gun turns you into a target for government sharp-shooters.

Ironically, while America continues to debate who or what is responsible for gun violence—the guns, the gun owners, or our violent culture—little has been said about the fact that the greatest perpetrator of violence in American society and around the world is the U.S. government.

Government violence is the missing link in the gun control debate.

Violence has become the government’s calling card, starting at the top and trickling down, from the more than 80,000 SWAT team raids carried out every year on unsuspecting Americans by heavily armed, black-garbed commandos and the increasingly rapid militarization of local police forces across the country to the drone killings used to target insurgents. The government even exports violence worldwide, with one of this country’s most profitable exports being weapons.

Thus, any serious discussion about minimizing the violence in our society needs to address the manner in which the government and its cohorts (the police, the various government agencies that are now armed to the hilt, the military, the defense contractors, etc.) use violence as a means to an end, whether domestically or in matters of foreign policy.

You want to reduce gun violence? Start with the government.

Except that the government has no intention of scaling back on its weapons. To the contrary, the government’s efforts to militarize and weaponize its own agencies and employees is reaching epic proportions, with federal agencies as varied as the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration placing orders for hundreds of millions of rounds of hollow point bullets.

Talk about a double standard.

The government’s arsenal of weapons makes the average American’s handgun look like a Tinker Toy.

Under the auspices of a military “recycling” program, which allows local police agencies to acquire military-grade weaponry and equipment, more than $4.2 billion worth of equipment has been transferred from the Defense Department to domestic police agencies since 1990. Included among these “gifts” are tank-like, 20-ton Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles, tactical gear, and assault rifles.

Ironically, while gun critics continue to clamor for bans on military-style assault weapons, high-capacity magazines and armor-piercing bullets, expanded background checks, and tougher gun-trafficking laws, the U.S. military boasts all of these and more, including some weapons the rest of the world doesn’t have.

Included in the government’s arsenal are armed, surveillance Reaper drones capable of reading a license plate from over two miles away; an AA12 Atchisson Assault Shotgun that can shoot five 12-gauge shells per second and “can fire up to 9,000 rounds without being cleaned or jamming”; an ADAPTIV invisibility cloak that can make a tank disappear or seemingly reshape it to look like a car; a PHASR rifle capable of blinding and disorienting anyone caught in its sights; a Taser shockwave that can electrocute a crowd of people at the touch of a button; an XM2010 enhanced sniper rifle with built-in sound and flash suppressors that can hit a man-sized target nine out of ten times from over a third of a mile away; and an XM25 “Punisher” grenade launcher that can be programmed to accurately shoot grenades at a target up to 500 meters away.

In the hands of government agents, whether they are members of the military, law enforcement or some other government agency, these weapons have become accepted instruments of tyranny, routine parts of America’s day-to-day life, a byproduct of the rapid militarization of law enforcement over the past several decades.

This lopsided, top-heavy, authoritarian state of affairs is not the balance of power the founders intended for “we the people.”

The Second Amendment, in conjunction with the multitude of prohibitions on government overreach enshrined in the Bill of Rights, was supposed to serve as a clear shackle on the government’s powers. As 20th century libertarian Edmund A. Opitz observed in 1964, “No one can read our Constitution without concluding that the people who wrote it wanted their government severely limited; the words ‘no’ and ‘not’ employed in restraint of government power occur 24 times in the first seven articles of the Constitution and 22 more times in the Bill of Rights.”

To founders such as Thomas Jefferson, who viewed the government as a powerful entity that must be bound “down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution,” the right to bear arms was no different from any other right enshrined in the Constitution: it was intended to stand as a bulwark against a police state.

Without any one of those freedoms, we are that much more vulnerable to the vagaries of out-of-control policemen, benevolent dictators, genuflecting politicians, and overly ambitious bureaucrats.

Writing for Counterpunch, journalist Kevin Carson suggests that prohibiting Americans from owning weapons would be as dangerously ineffective as Prohibition and the War on the Drugs:

“[W]hat strict gun laws will do is take the level of police statism, lawlessness and general social pathology up a notch in the same way Prohibition and the Drug War have done. I’d expect a War on Guns to expand the volume of organized crime, and to empower criminal gangs fighting over control over the black market, in exactly the same way Prohibition did in the 1920s and strict drug laws have done since the 1980s. I’d expect it to lead to further erosion of Fourth Amendment protections against search and seizure, further militarization of local police via SWAT teams, and further expansion of the squalid empire of civil forfeiture, perjured jailhouse snitch testimony, entrapment, planted evidence, and plea deal blackmail.”

This is exactly what those who drafted the U.S. Constitution feared: that laws and law enforcers would be used as tools by a despotic government to wage war against the citizenry.

This phenomenon is what philosopher Abraham Kaplan referred to as the law of the instrument, which essentially says that to a hammer, everything looks like a nail. As I explain in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, we the citizenry have become the nails to be hammered by the government’s battalion of laws and law enforcers (its police officers, technicians, bureaucrats, spies, snitches, inspectors, accountants, etc.), and we’re supposed to take the beatings without complaint or reproach.

Now don’t get me wrong.

I do not sanction violence, nor do I believe that violence should ever be the answer to our problems. As John Lennon warned, “When it gets down to having to use violence, then you are playing the system’s game. The establishment will irritate you—pull your beard, flick your face—to make you fight. Because once they’ve got you violent, then they know how to handle you.”

Still there’s something to be said for George Orwell’s view that “that rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer’s cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there.”

The Second Amendment serves as a check on the political power of the ruling authorities. It represents an implicit warning against governmental encroachments on one’s freedoms, the warning shot over the bow to discourage any unlawful violations of our persons or property.

Certainly, dictators in past regimes have understood this principle only too well.

As Adolf Hitler noted, “The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing.”

It should come as no surprise, then, that starting in December 1935, Jews in Germany were prevented from obtaining shooting licenses, because authorities believed that to allow them to do so would “endanger the German population.”

In late 1938, special orders were delivered barring Jews from owning firearms, with the punishment for arms possession being 20 years in a concentration camp.

The rest, as they say, is history. Yet it is a history that we should be wary of repeating.

Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos (Click for details).


Contributed by John W. Whitehead of The Rutherford Institute.

Since 1996, John W. Whitehead has taken on everything from human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia, protection of religious freedom, and child pornography, to family autonomy issues, cross burning, the sanctity of human life, and the war on terrorism in his weekly opinion column. A self-proclaimed civil libertarian, Whitehead is considered by many to be a legal, political and cultural watchdog—sounding the call for integrity, accountability and an adherence to the democratic principles on which this country was founded.

Time and again, Whitehead hits the bull’s eye with commentaries that are insightful, relevant and provocative. And all too often, he finds himself under fire for his frank and unadulterated viewpoint. But as he frequently remarks, “Anytime people find themselves under fire from both the liberal left and the conservative right, it means that that person is probably right on target.”

Mr. Whitehead’s commentaries have appeared in the Los Angeles Times, New York Times, Washington Post, Washington Times and USA Today.


Subscribe to The Sleuth Journal Newsletter for Daily Articles!


The post Execution by Firing Squad: The Militarized Police State Opens Fire appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Does Vitamin D Toxicity Exist?

Does Vitamin D Toxicity Exist? | vitamin-d | General Health Sleuth Journal Special Interests

Vitamin D is one of the most important and most misunderstood vitamin of our time, and many people simply aren’t receiving enough. Most people are deficient in vitamin D due to lack of sunlight exposure. We’re modern-day cavemen, trapped in our offices and homes, rarely ever exposing our skin to the life-giving energy of the sun. Vitamin D supplementation is perhaps the most viable alternative, but many people are concerned over taking too much, fearing that excess vitamin D can lead to toxicity. While it’s true you should have your vitamin D levels checked to ensure optimal supplementation levels, the truth is that vitamin D toxicity may hold no clinical relevance in current scientific research.Does Vitamin D Toxicity Exist? | ir?source=bk&t=thesleuthjour-20&bm-id=default&l=ktl&linkId=cc9d73e534a9dd16d3d948e5aa0dbf8e&_cb=1431988984179 | General Health Sleuth Journal Special Interests

 The Myth of Vitamin D Toxicity

A common concern regarding vitamin supplementation is toxicity. Taking too much of a good thing is never a good thing, and this holds true for most nutrients. The good thing about vitamin D, however, is that no evidence has conclusively shown vitamin D toxicity exists. What’s more, a recent study has concluded that there is probably no risk to taking vitamin D over 10,000 IUs. [1] This study echoes previous research that has revealed similar findings.

According to the Vitamin D Council, 5,000 IU/day of vitamin D supplementation can be helpful for getting your vitamin D to its optimal level. [1] Keep in mind that this amount is for individuals who know their current vitamin D status. Without knowing your actual blood levels of vitamin D, you’re more or less grasping at straws and could be supplementing with far less than you need. Consult with your doctor to determine your level and supplementation needs.

Do you get enough vitamin D? What type of supplementation do you implement, if any? Please let us know your thoughts about vitamin D in the comments!

References:

  1. Rachael Rettner. Can Too Much Vitamin D Be Toxic? Live Science.
  2. Vitamin D Council. How do I get the vitamin D my body needs? Vitamin D Council.


Subscribe to The Sleuth Journal Newsletter for Daily Articles!


The post Does Vitamin D Toxicity Exist? appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

The Secretive Bank Of England

The Secretive Bank Of England | bank-of-england | Banks Global Bankster Takeover Rothschild Sleuth Journal World News

With the enactment of the privately owned central bank, the Bank of England provided the model for the financial enslavement of governments, and their citizens. Well before the conflict for establishing a National Bank in America or the eventual surrender to the money changers with the betrayal in instituting the Federal Reserve, the history of the Bank of England needs to be studied. Relying on British historians may seem to invoke a cultural bias; however, the range and wealth of information on this topic comes from an earlier age. Further research will expand this understanding and many of the sources cited can fulfill this objective.

For purposes of a mainstream account, the official site of the Bank of England provides a flowery version about the background and purported success of the scheme proposed by “William Paterson, envisaged a loan of £1,200,000 to the Government, in return for which the subscribers would be incorporated as the “Governor and Company of the Bank of England”. Although the new bank would have risked its entire capital by lending it to the Government, the subscription proved popular and the money was raised in a few weeks. The Royal Charter was sealed on 27 July 1694, and the Bank started its role as the Government’s banker and debt-manager, which it continues today.”

“The bank hath benefit of interest on all moneys which it creates out of nothing.”  

– William Paterson

THE FORMATION OF THE BANK OF ENGLAND by Halley Goodman provides a detailed and well sourced chronicle and background.

“The goldsmiths evolved to become the original private bankers of the time. Since  goldsmiths already had as part of their trade private stores of gold and stout vaults to store them in, entrepreneurs could entrust their own gold to them for safe keeping, for a fee, and receive a paper receipt for the deposit. The goldsmiths could then lend monies against these deposits for an additional fee. Mr. Hartley Winters declares that “some ingenious goldsmith conceived the epock-making notion of giving notes…and so founded modern banking.” Merchants would deposit “their money with the goldsmiths and received from them receipts” that “…were payable on demand, and were transferred from one holder to another in payment of debts.” These receipts or notes from the goldsmith bankers, often in the form of a letter, are some of the earliest surviving cheques in England. Given the economic realities of the time, although deposits provided the funds for their business, most of the clients of these goldsmith bankers were usually borrowers rather than depositors.”

From such humble origins, the foundation was laid to invent a central bank that would create money out of thin air and loan it at interest to the government, who lost it sovereignty for making this Faustian bargain.

Secrets of the Bank of England Revealed at Last!!

The Charter of the Bank of England (1694) with the Great Seal of William and Mary. The first usury central bank to be incorporated in England. 

The Bank of England account, published by Cassell, Petter & Galpin cites a rocky start and opposition from the goldsmiths.

“In 1696 (very soon after its birth) the Bank experienced a crisis. There was a want of money in England. The clipped silver had been called in, and the new money was not ready. Even rich people were living on credit, and issued promissory notes. The stock of the Bank of England had gone rapidly down from 110 to 83. The goldsmiths, who detested the corporation that had broken in on their system of private banking, now tried to destroy the new company. They plotted, and on the same day they crowded to Grocers’ Hall, where the Bank was located from 1694 to 1734, and insisted on immediate payment—one goldsmith alone demanding £30,000. The directors paid all their honest creditors, but refused to cash the goldsmiths’ notes, and left them their remedy in Westminster Hall. The goldsmiths triumphed in scurrilous pasquinades entitled, “The Last Will and Testament,” “The Epitaph,” “The Inquest on the Bank of England.”

It did not take long for the Jewish bankers to set their sights on Paterson’s bank and financers for the English regime. Brother Nathanael Kapner adds his audacious viewpoints.

“The new King William III soon got England involved in costly wars against Catholic France which put England deep into debt. Here was the Jewish bankers’ chance to collect. So King William, under orders from the Elders of Zion in Amsterdam, persuaded the British Treasury to borrow 1.25 million pounds of sterling from the Jewish bankers who had helped him to the throne.

Since the state’s debts had risen dramatically, the government had no choice but to accept. But there were conditions attached: The names of the lenders were to be kept secret and that they be granted a Charter to establish a Central Bank of England. Parliament accepted and the Jewish bankers sunk their tentacles into Great Britain.”

Actual control of the fiat central bank is discussed in Who owns the Bank of England?

“A very famous story relates to the Bank of England and the infamous Rothschilds, that all powerful banking family. This story was re-told recently in a BBC documentary about the creation of money and the Bank of England.

It revolves around the Battle of Waterloo in which Nathan Rothschild used his inside knowledge of the outcome and his faster horses and couriers to play the market by getting the result of the battle before anyone else knew the outcome.

He quickly sold his English bonds and gave all the traders who looked to him for guidance the impression that the French had won at Waterloo.

The other traders all rushed to sell their bonds before the market crashed thinking that they were now worthless and a massive fire-sale occurred as brokers clamered to get rid of their stock. This massive sell off quickly drove the price of the bonds down to 5% of their original worth.

Once the bottom had dropped out the market Nathan Rothschild then re-bought as many bonds back as he could at hugely discounted prices and in doing so he multiplied his wealth twenty times in 3 days of trading.

At the same time as becoming immensely wealthy he also became the single largest debtor to the English government which ultimately gave him control over the bank of England.”

If you are so inclined to do your own research, two sources, HISTORY OF THE BANK OF ENGLAND written by Dr. A. Andreades and Complete Histories: Bank of England to 1694, are worthy of review.

“As you can see by the 250-year chart of Bank of England stock, the shares showed no real trend during the 1700s, rose in price during the Napoleonic Wars as England left the gold standard and suffered inflation, declined in price from around 1818 to 1845 during the deflation that followed, rose in price for the rest of the 1800s as the Bank gradually increased its dividend, plunged until 1920 as inflation occurred without any compensating rise in the dividend, then gradually rose in price until the Bank was nationalized in 1945. The behavior of the Bank of England’s stock encapsulates the general behavior of the British stock market over that 250-year period.”

Now for most of its history the privately held Bank of England was extremely profitable to its owners. The method for charging interest on the creation of money has been the prime vehicle for driving both public and private debt throughout modern times.

The Guardian reports in the article, The truth is out: money is just an IOU, and the banks are rolling in it.

“The Bank of England let the cat out of the bag. In a paper called “Money Creation in the Modern Economy“, co-authored by three economists from the Bank’s Monetary Analysis Directorate, they stated outright that most common assumptions of how banking works are simply wrong, and that the kind of populist, heterodox positions more ordinarily associated with groups such as Occupy Wall Street are correct. In doing so, they have effectively thrown the entire theoretical basis for austerity out of the window.”

The entire monitory financial system is based upon charging usury on the creation of national currencies. No larger debtor exists than governments. The perfection of the Rothschild fraud is founded upon charging compound interest on the very medium of exchange that serves as legal tender.

The Bank of England set the stage for the centralization of all banking under the umbrella of banksters control. In order to discover all the secrets of manipulating the financial system, one must comprehend, the first and primary lesson; that central banks do not function as beneficiaries to their host nation, much less the ordinary “little people”.

Keeping this deplorable rip-off system extorting their pound of flesh is the principal objective of the financial elites. Interest on government bonds must be paid. More debt needs to be incurred. And the framework for human impoverishment lies at the feet of central banking.


Subscribe to The Sleuth Journal Newsletter for Daily Articles!


The post The Secretive Bank Of England appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Are We on the Verge of a Massive Earthquake…or Something Much Worse? (VIDEO)

Are We on the Verge of a Massive Earthquake…or Something Much Worse? (VIDEO) | are-we-on-the-verge-of-a-massive-earthquake | Environment Multimedia Sleuth Journal Special Interests

A  strong uptick in seismic activities in two places in the United States has experts concerned about the possibility of a massive earthquake…or something exponentially worse – the potential eruption of the Yellowstone Supervolcano.

The pressure in the San Andreas Fault is increasing.

Mac Slavo wrote about the warning signs at the San Andreas fault, 100 miles outside of Los Angeles.

A study published earlier this year concluded that the land on either side of the San Andreas fault has been pushing against the other at a rate of more than 1 inch per year since 1857, and the tensions between the plates are eventually going to give out.

“So, you expect that amount of accumulation of energy will be released in the future in a large-magnitude rupture, somewhere along the San Andreas,” said USGS research geologist and study lead author Kate Scharer.

Seismologist Lucy Jones predicts that a San Andreas earthquake beginning at the Salton Sea could be as strong as an 8.2 if it got all the way to Paso Robles.  That powerful of a quake could result in massive loss of life and damages. An 8.2 earthquake would produce far more energy than what was produced by the nuclear bomb dropped on Hiroshima.  (source)

But as awful as that scenario sounds, we could have even bigger problems.

There have been hundreds of earthquakes in Yellowstone this week.

A swarm of earthquakes in iconic Yellowstone Park has scientists on alert. The US Geological Survey has reported nearly 300 quakes since last Monday. By themselves, this would not be incredibly worrisome.

But anyone who has ever driven through Yellowstone and witnessed the natural thermal activity throughout the park becomes fully aware that they’re driving over a massive pocket of molten lava…a supervolcano. This video explains exactly what lies under Yellowstone National Park.

What would happen in the event of an eruption?

Michael Snyder of the website, The End of the American Dream, paints a chilling picture of what an eruption of the Yellowstone Volcano would look like:

Hundreds of cubic miles of ash, rock and lava would be blasted into the atmosphere, and this would likely plunge much of the northern hemisphere into several days of complete darkness. Virtually everything within 100 miles of Yellowstone would be immediately killed, but a much more cruel fate would befall those that live in major cities outside of the immediate blast zone such as Salt Lake City and Denver.

Hot volcanic ash, rock and dust would rain down on those cities literally for weeks. In the end, it would be extremely difficult for anyone living in those communities to survive. In fact, it has been estimated that 90 percent of all people living within 600 miles of Yellowstone would be killed.

Experts project that such an eruption would dump a layer of volcanic ash that is at least 10 feet deep up to 1,000 miles away, and approximately two-thirds of the United States would suddenly become uninhabitable. The volcanic ash would severely contaminate most of our water supplies, and growing food in the middle of the country would become next to impossible…

The rest of the planet, and this would especially be true for the northern hemisphere, would experience what is known as a “nuclear winter”. An extreme period of “global cooling” would take place, and temperatures around the world would fall by up to 20 degrees. Crops would fail all over the planet, and severe famine would sweep the globe.

In the end, billions could die. (source)

How do you even begin to prepare for an earthquake so massive?

The first thing you need to know is how to withstand the initial disaster. In the event of a massive earthquake, it depends whether you are indoors or outdoors what you should do. Go here to learn how to survive an earthquake.

Assuming you survive the quake, the aftermath can be every bit as dangerous. Your best bet is to get to a safe structure and remain there.

Aftershocks may be just as strong as the original earthquake, and in some cases, even weak aftershocks can cause further infrastructure damage to structures that have been weakened by the earlier seismic activity. So it’s important to note that even if your shelter is originally safe, you’ll need to reassess after subsequent quakes.

Expect that emergency services such as police, fire, and ambulances will be unavailable. You will be on your own with only the supplies that you have available to you. Utilities will almost certainly be interrupted and there is a high risk of fire after a massive earthquake. If the water is still running, there is a high likelihood that it will be tainted. You should have the supplies on hand to hunker down with your family for at least a month.

How do you prep for the eruption of a supervolcano?

This is much more difficult.

When considering the long-term affects of this, having as much food stockpiled as possible is essential. But for the purposes of this article, let’s talk about short-term survival and worry about the nuclear winter part later.

Cliff Montgomery from Secrets of Survival wrote about the eruption of Mount St. Helens back in 1980.

Shaken 10 minutes earlier by an earthquake measuring 5.1 on the Richter scale, the north face of this tall, symmetrical volcano collapsed, resulting in the largest known landslide in world history. These slabs of earth and ice slammed into nearby Spirit Lake, crossed a ridge 1,300 feet high, and roared 14 miles down the Toutle River.

The avalanche rapidly released pressurized gases that had long been surging inside the mountain. For at least a week its northwestern flank had been bulging out as much as 12 feet a day from the increasing pressure of rising magma.

And then Mount St. Helens – a pristine, previously dormant volcano that had long been a major part of the eastern Washington landscape – mostly ceased to exist.

The explosion was five hundred times more powerful than either of the atom bombs dropped on Hiroshima or Nagasaki.

The tremendous lateral blast turned 250 million cubic yards of mountain into a turbulent, stone-filled wind that swept over ridges, toppled trees and scorched the earth nearby at temperatures well over 600 degrees Fahrenheit, flattening or disintegrating practically everything within a 150 square miles of the volcano’s northern side.

Within minutes the eruption began blasting material straight up into the sky; it would continue for 9 hours. The top 1,317 feet of the peak and most of its northwestern side were no more. In its place would eventually be a gaping, horseshoe-shaped crater 2,460 feet deep, making St. Helens little more than a gargantuan shell.

The final result of this activity was a mushroom-shaped column of volcanic ash that rose thousands of feet skyward and drifted across eastern Washington and beyond, turning day into darkest night as gray ash fell over a major part of the southwest. Melted snow and earth became wet, cement-like slurries of rock and mud scouring all sides of the volcano. Searing flows of white-hot lava oozed from the gaping crater. (source)

(Definitely, check out this article. It continues and shares a story of first-hand survival about a logger who was far too close when the volcano erupted.)

And as horrific as this eruption was, it was tiny in comparison to an eruption of Yellowstone.

It’s entirely possible that a supervolcano would be unsurvivable, particularly for those within 600 miles. If you are in the outer part of that radius, have a plan to get in your car and drive in the opposite direction as fast as you can the moment you hear about the eruption. The wave of ash will take a while to spread to the outer parts of that circumference, and it will all depend on the winds how quickly it gets to you.

If you survive the initial eruption, your next concern will be ash.

Volcanic ash is superfine particles of rock. It’s essential to avoid breathing this into your lungs or getting it into your eyes. Your best bet is a gas mask, and your next best bet is an N100 mask with a particulate respirator. You can also stock a dual cartridge respirator (this one comes with goggles) like the kind that painters use. If all else fails, tying a bandana around your nose and mouth is better than nothing at all. Protect your eyes with snug-fitting safety goggles, or even swim goggles. (We keep swim goggles in our bug-out bags after living in a place prone to wildfires for 3 years.)

When you hunker down, you need to secure your home (or wherever you are) against the ash that will soon coat everything like a blizzard.

  • Fill every possible container in your home with water before it gets tainted, including sinks and bathtubs.
  • Close all ducts to the outside.
  • Tape shut the edges of your windows.
  • Place damp towels against the bottom of all exterior doors.
  • Turn off central heat and air conditioning.
  • If you have a fireplace or woodstove, close your dampers.

When the ash is no longer falling as thickly, you may need to go clear accumulated ash off your roof to keep it from collapsing. Wear your goggles and respirator, as well as full-length pants, long sleeves, and a hat. Remove this clothing at the door when you come back into your house.

While ash is falling, avoid running your vehicles.  The sediment will clog up the engine and damage it, and you won’t be able to use your vehicle to evacuate later.

Many people would have to be evacuated outside of America.

Should Yellowstone erupt, it’s entirely likely that a large part of the United States would become uninhabitable. Our government has contracts with some countries in South America for this very reason.

Shepard Ambellas of Intellihub wrote:

The U.S. is currently under contract with at least 4 countries all of which have agreed to house displaced U.S. citizens in the unfortunate event the Yellowstone supervolcano were to erupt. Hundreds of billions of dollars were paid to foreign governments to facilitate the agreement which spans a ten year period from its signing, ending in 2024.

An excerpt from an article I authored in April of 2014 titled: “Report: Brazil, Argentina and Australia sign contracts worth hundreds of billions of dollars to house displaced U.S. populace when Yellowstone supervolcano erupts” reads:

The U.S. plan for relocation was formulated after a recent scientific analysis of the park revealed that Yellowstone’s supervolcano has the potential to violently erupt within the next 10-years as noted by others including the famous astrophysicist Michio Kaku… according to the report, “Brazil, Argentina and Australia” jumped on the bandwagon, accepting the request from Washington. (source)

How badly would your area be affected by an eruption of the Yellowstone Supervolcano?

Nearly the entire continental US would be affected to some degree by an eruption of the Yellowstone Supervolcano. The USGS speculates this is what the ashfall would look like a month after the eruption.

Are We on the Verge of a Massive Earthquake…or Something Much Worse? (VIDEO) | usgs-map | Environment Multimedia Sleuth Journal Special Interests

Live Science reports:

The ash would be pretty devastating for the United States, scientists predict. The fallout would include short-term destruction of Midwest agriculture, and rivers and streams would be clogged by gray muck.

People living in the Pacific Northwest might also be choking on Yellowstone’s fallout…

But California and Florida, which grow most of the country’s fruits and vegetables, would see only a dusting of ash…

Yellowstone Volcano’s next supereruption is likely to spew vast quantities of gases such as sulfur dioxide, which forms a sulfur aerosol that absorbs sunlight and reflects some of it back to space. The resulting climate cooling could last up to a decade. The temporary climate shift could alter rainfall patterns, and, along with severe frosts, cause widespread crop losses and famine. (source)

Like many disasters that seem as though they’d be extinction-level events, even this is survivable if you aren’t right in the middle of things when the initial eruption occurs.

But recent seismic activity should be a reminder that Mother Nature can throw a monkey wrench in our plans at any given moment.

We need to be prepared, because I strongly suspect, to paraphrase, “We ain’t seen nothin’, yet.”


Subscribe to The Sleuth Journal Newsletter for Daily Articles!


The post Are We on the Verge of a Massive Earthquake…or Something Much Worse? (VIDEO) appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

We Already Have a Universal Basic Income

By: Laurence M. Vance, lewrockwell.com

Harvard dropout and Facebook billionaire Mark Zuckerberg recently gave the commencement address at Harvard. In his speech he proposed a “universal basic income to make sure everyone has a cushion to try new ideas.”

But Zuckerberg is not alone.

First it was Milton Friedman, then it was Charles Murray, and then it was Matt Zwolinski. Now it is Michael Tanner and Jesse Walker. Why are some libertarians even talking about a universal basic income or a guaranteed minimum income? Why are some libertarians trying to be efficiency experts for the welfare state?

We already have a universal basic income. It is called welfare.

There are in the United States about eighty means-tested welfare programs. These are programs that limit benefits or payments based on the beneficiary’s income and/or assets. There are also welfare programs that most Americans have never heard of. And there are other welfare programs that most Americans don’t consider to be welfare programs.

Welfare is welfare, no matter what it is called and no matter what people think about.

The elderly have Social Security and Medicare.

The elderly poor also have access to the Elderly Nutrition Program and the Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSFP).

The disabled have Supplemental Security Income (SSI), and are also eligible for Social Security and Medicare.

The poor have Medicaid, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP [formerly known as food stamps]), section 8 housing vouchers, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP), subsidized phone service, community health centers, public housing, and family planning programs.

Hungry children have school breakfast and lunch programs.

Low-income taxpayers have refundable tax credits like the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), Additional Child Tax Credit (ACTC), and the American Opportunity Tax Credit (AOTC).

The unemployed have free federal job training programs.

Those who get laid off from their jobs have unemployment compensation.

Low-income pregnant women and new mothers have Healthy Start and Women, Infants, and Children (WIC).

Low-income students have Pell Grants and all students have access to federal student loans.

Farmers have farm subsidies.

Refugees have assistance programs.

Homeowners have low-cost federal flood insurance.

All parents can send their children to public schools at no cost.

Let’s take a closer look at just one of the above welfare programs: the EITC.

Unlike regular tax credits, refundable tax credits are a form of welfare. A regular tax credit is a dollar-for-dollar reduction of the amount of income tax owed. Tax credits may reduce the tax owed to zero, but if there is no taxable income to begin with, then no credit can be taken. A refundable tax credit is treated as a payment from the taxpayer like federal income tax withheld or estimated tax payments. If the tax credit “payment” is more than the tax owed after the regular tax credits are applied, then the “taxpayer” receives a refund of the money he never actually paid in. The money is simply taken from real taxpayers and transferred to him.

According to the IRS:

The Earned Income Tax Credit, EITC or EIC, is a benefit for working people with low to moderate income. To qualify, you must meet certain requirements and file a tax return, even if you do not owe any tax or are not required to file. EITC reduces the amount of tax you owe and may give you a refund.

For the tax year 2016, the maximum EITC amounts are:

$6,269 with three or more qualifying children

$5,572 with two qualifying children

$3,373 with one qualifying child

$506 with no qualifying children

To qualify for the EITC, if one is single, earned income and adjusted gross income (AGI) must each be less than $14,880 (no children), $39,296 (1 child), $44,648 (2 children), or $47,955 (3 or more children). For married taxpayers, the amounts are $20,430 (no children), $44,846 (1 child), $50,198 (2 children), $53,505 (3 or more children).

If one has three children, the sweet spot to receive the maximum EITC is achieved when one has income of at least $13,900 but less than $18,200 (single) or $23,750 (married). And don’t think that people receiving the EITC don’t have some idea of this.

Americans who receive the EITC get another added benefit as well. According to page 58 of the IRS’s 1040 instructions for 2016:

Any refund you receive as a result of taking the EIC can’t be counted as income when determining if you or anyone else is eligible for benefits or assistance, or how much you or anyone else can receive, under any  federal  program or under any state or local program  financed in whole or in part with federal funds. These programs include Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income  (SSI), and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (food stamps). In addition, when determining eligibility, the refund can’t be counted as a resource for at least 12 months after you receive it. Check with your local benefit coordinator to find out if your refund will affect your benefits.

The problem with a guaranteed minimum income, like the problem with welfare in general, is that it is the government that is the guarantor. But before the government can give, it must first take from productive members of society. This is what makes all welfare immoral.

Libertarians who talk in any way about a universal basic income should make the immorality of welfare the central theme, not an afterthought.

Welfare doesn’t need to be reformed, improved, changed, replaced, fixed, saved, revamped, simplified, trimmed, or made more effective or efficient. It doesn’t need to have more stringent enrollment requirements, it doesn’t need drug testing for recipients, it doesn’t need stronger work requirements, and it doesn’t need time limits. It needs to be completely eliminated in its entirety, and all the government bureaucrats that administer welfare programs be laid off, not reassigned. The welfare state doesn’t need libertarian efficiency experts. It needs to be destroyed root and branch.


Laurence M. Vance [send him mail] writes from central Florida. He is the author of The War on Drugs Is a War on Freedom; War, Christianity, and the State: Essays on the Follies of Christian Militarism; War, Empire, and the Military: Essays on the Follies of War and U.S. Foreign Policy; King James, His Bible, and Its Translators, and many other books. His newest book is Gun Control and the Second Amendment. Visit his website.

The post We Already Have a Universal Basic Income appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Here’s Everything You Need to Know About the Alex Jones “Condolences” to Sandy Hook Parents (VIDEO)

Here's Everything You Need to Know About the Alex Jones "Condolences" to Sandy Hook Parents (VIDEO) | alex-jones | False Flags Multimedia Sleuth Journal Special Interests US News

There’s a funny thing about Truth, it needs to only be brought to light and then it penetrates your conscience and ultimately speaks for itself. We humans often operate with a sense of ownership of information which we quietly convince ourselves is the objective truth. We all like to think that we are right or that we know something that someone else doesn’t. This is a natural instinct in humanity that is part of who we are. This sense of ownership of Truth can lead to distortions about what makes something true or not because the sense of “ownership” is tied to affection and emotion. Think of someone enjoying a favorite music, food or color. The rules that should apply for getting at the truth are then distorted, ignored or forgotten thus disrupting the very path to truth we were supposed to be on. Yes, there are actual rules for getting at the truth! More on this later. This brings us to the recent Alex Jones “condolences” speech to the Sandy Hook “parents” (yes you read this right!). Let’s analyze the speech and see if we can make sense of it.

As many alternative media followers know by now Jones put out a strange short “Fathers Day” statement actually offering condolences to the Sandy Hook parents and essentially implying that accepting the Sandy Hook fakery and lies being told by everyone involved in the Sandy Hook fakery is the way to “peace in our country”! Yes, peace through lies! Easily verified lies given that there isn’t one shred of reality to the Sandy Hook botched psyop staged event of December 14, 2012. But instead of repeating the many well known pieces that don’t fit, instead of challenging the audience to see for themselves that fund-raising web pages were prepared for the “victims” BEFORE December 14, 2012 and instead of pointing to the towering lack of evidence surrounding Sandy Hook hoax Jones doubled down Jones in his statement saying:

“Parents should never have to bury their own children. And that’s why on Fathers Day I want to reach out to the parents of the slain children at the horrible tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut and give you my sincere condolences. I’d also like to reach out to any of the parents who lost a child in Newtown, to invite them to contact me to open a dialog because I think it’s really essential we do that instead of letting the MSM misrepresent things and really try to drive this nation apart. Right now is the time for unity and peace in our country I think now more than ever “

First, I want to be clear. This is not intended as a piece to bash Jones who I mostly agree with and appreciate what he does. And before we go bashing Jones or conversely making excuses for him let’s break this all down to pieces and see what we come up with.

The first thing I want to point out is, when was the last time Jones did a one minute rant? Jones usually rants for long and has a lot to say about topics. In fact this statement is handled in a very un-Jones-like manner. The speech is not only very short and concise but it seems very prepared. That’s strange in and of itself but let’s take a look at some of the more serious issues surrounding this bizarre speech reaching out to the Sandy Hook criminals and then we’ll explore to see if there is anything good that may come out of this or if it’s all bad.

The Megyn Kelly agenda

This speech appears to have been coordinated with the Megyn Kelly interview drama where Kelly specifically brings up Sandy Hook. I didn’t watch the full NBC interview but based on the trailer that NBC was pushing I believe the primary purpose of the Megyn Kelly interview with Alex Jones was to reiterate and reinforce the most important psyop event of the Obama years and that is the Sandy Hook fake shooting of December 14, 2012. Let’s put it this way, the Sandy Hook hoax is to the Obama administration what 9/11 was to the Bush administration. Both events are being protected to the bitter end by the deep state as they are the 2 most important events of the past 16 years in my opinion.

So with this primary agenda of reinforcing Sandy Hook, Kelly used her platform to raise other issues so as to not make it too obvious. At the core of the agenda however, I believe was this perfectly timed “Fathers Day” emotional message attempting to get everyone to “connect” emotionally with the fake Sandy Hook parents. To convince yourself of this ask yourself if Kelly and Jones spoke for so long why was the “Sandy Hook” portion of the conversation the main attraction in the previews? And why is Sandy Hook seemingly the primary topic that Jones is coming back to in this “Fathers Day speech”? Let’s explore additional arguments.

Why Sandy Hook in the first place?

Everyone should be asking themselves, given what we know about the degree of fakery surrounding Sandy Hook, the towering lack of transparency, the vile, arrogant and persecutory nature of the anonymous attorneys and bullies working behind the scenes to intimidate, smear and falsely accuse anyone who questions the lack of evidence in the Sandy Hook story, why are they continuing to protect this event? And the answer is because this event is very special in that it involves children who are currently being potentially abused because their identities (and perhaps their self identities) have been obfuscated from the general public. The Sandy Hook children are thus essentially missing children, several of which were last seen at the 2013 Super Bowl half time show but have not been seen ever since. The ruling elite thus know that the potential punishment that will descend on the conspirators involved in this event is unfathomable. All of this amounts to an operation to stay out of jail. This is important to the Sandy Hook conspirators given the climate we are in now where all of their crimes are being exposed to the general public especially the pedophilia and human trafficking crimes they are involved in. The fact of the matter is that there is no greater in-your-face human trafficking story than the Sandy Hook story. The ruling elite know this and thus are committed to protecting Sandy Hook forever so that it never migrates to the Justice Department.

What’s really behind the Jones 2017 cycle of apologies and condolences?

As many of you know this is the second time in the past few months that Alex Jones has issued an unprecedented statement protecting a suspected deep state entity (or entitites) involved with children. Back on March 28, 2017 we spoke about the mysterious Alex Jones “apology” to suspected criminal and pedophile James Alefantis owner of Comet Ping Pong pizzeria. A place where video recordings of music bands playing have been put out where the band member is joking quite creepily about pedophilia and the audience laughs along! And the same Alefantis who posted strange pedophilia suggestive photos of little children tied up on his Instagram page. Yes, THAT Alefantis!

Despite the connections to pedophilia suggested in the John Podesta emails revealed by Wikileaks Jones, after seemingly being threatened by Alefantis issued a strange public apology to Alefantis who I’m sure was more than proud to lavish in his fictitious and engineered innocence even if only for a day.

Given that Jones is as much aware of the fakery behind Sandy Hook as anyone else we have to wonder what this is really all about and where this is potentially headed. We should all be wondering whether this is an example of Jones compromising the truth for one reason or another, or is this part of a deeper game being played out by Jones against the Sandy Hook conspirators themselves? I do wonder whether this could be the reason Jones is challenging the Sandy Hook criminals to reach out to him. Is this a bait being put out by Jones? Or is this a nefarious operation against truth itself? Has Jones been threatened again? It’s possible that Jones’ “neutral” position on Sandy Hook could to be part of a deeper strategy to lure the Liberal Left into considering his message and not turning him off. (think “Art of the Deal”).

Naturally, many are wondering why would Jones would cut a deal with the deep state which ensures massive loss of loyal followers? Or has Jones calculated that he can keep the majority of his base and spread his message even farther? While all of this is a very optimistic view of the situation there is no proof that this is the explanation and we can only speculate about this.

Conversely, consider that this is the same Jones who wants to also see America become great again and has been fighting for truth for many years. And what we also need to be asking is, are we to think that the road to a great America or even more importantly the road to truth and justice is improved by accepting the Sandy Hook lies? Are we to believe that the best road to “unity and peace” in our country, as Jones puts it, is by way of simply accepting lies like the Sandy Hook story? Are there no better paths to unity and peace??

My initial reaction is that this approach is inconsistent with Natural Law and has many moral and ethical conflicts built into it and thus it is difficult for me to agree with this path. This of course would leave us with some troubling questions surrounding this Jones “condolences” speech.

Know what you believe in … and why

The most important message in this article today is that we must all remember that the primary issue here is the pursuit of truth. As I mentioned at the very beginning, truth stands on its own and the grand fallacy hidden in all of this craziness is the illusion that repetition and rhetoric somehow makes something MORE true than it was before. Wrong! The only thing that makes something true is its state, nature and degree of self evidence. All of this Sandy Hook nonsense is attempting to challenge these fundamental principles of Natural Law as well as the principles of morality, reason and logic. And the Sandy Hook story fails again because tangible and clearly observable and objective evidence is the only thing that will ever make the Sandy Hook illusion real to a mentally healthy, astute, aware and discerning human being. This is not an opinion but a fact of life. That doesn’t mean we can’t all “emotionally” agree to believe someone blindly as the Sandy Hook official story believers are choosing to do when they believe and sympathize with the “parents”. When one chooses this path of blindly believing the words coming out of someone’s mouth above physical and tangible evidence the only thing required to keep you on that path of blind belief is enough negative reinforcement to prevent you from thinking otherwise. That my friends is probably the primary purpose and agenda for this entire June 2017 Sandy Hook topic revival.

Remember that the entire Sandy Hook illusion of lies, as are all government sponsored lies and deceit all rely on the tactic called the repetition principle. The repetition principle is based on a theory that if you hear something enough times eventually you’ll believe it. Understanding the repetition principle goes hand-in-hand with understanding how the brain responds to repeated stimulus and that includes voice and word stimulus as well as visual, chemical and physical stimulus. Mind control techniques, hypnosis even advertising and sales relies on this principle of repetition and certainly political propaganda thrives on this principle. For this reason it is very important to know what you believe and more importantly why you believe what you believe. This simple message is the solution to the Sandy Hook illusion as I illustrate below.

Solutions

So today I ask everyone including everyone in the media, every layperson, every average Joe and Jane out there. Not only what do YOU believe happened at Sandy Hook but more importantly please tell me WHY do you believe what you believe. And to that let me respond by telling you what I believe and why I believe what I believe.

I believe that every segment of the Sandy Hook story was faked because I’ve looked hard for years and can’t find one shred of evidence (video, audio, images, official emergency medical documents etc) that legitimizes the event. And the physical evidence that is available all disproves the “official story” narrative repeated by the mainstream media and of course the alleged parents of the supposed slain children. Thus I can only utter from my mouth what I observe not what I want to believe or what someone else is trying to bully me into believing and I objectively declare that looking at the available evidence I don’t see an operating school packed with children, I don’t see any videos of a gunman pulling up in a car and that looks like Adam Lanza assassinating 28 people. At the scene we didn’t see any blood, any ambulances or emergency workers saving precious lives as they normally would. As a former medical professional I’m aware that the scene at Sandy Hook violated every principle of medical ethics and emergency medical protocol. At the scene I didn’t see police and fire fighters getting cars out of the way and clearing a path for the emergency workers. I didn’t see any heroes or children brought back to life. I didn’t see any rescue helicopters flying in and out of the school. I didn’t hear of additional hospitals and rescue teams coordinating with the Newtown medical emergency teams to get the children to a hospital ASAP to either save or potentially revive them. Nothing at all. If we could pretend for a moment that the Sandy Hook massacre actually happened the way Megyn Kelly, the mainstream media and the Sandy Hook psyop parents say it did then on the day of the Sandy Hook massacre we witnessed the most outrageous display of human negligence and carelessness ever in the history of humankind. But I digress.

There were no angry parents crying for their children to be next on those rescue helicopters. There were no rescue workers with oxygen tanks, bloody gloves or anything. Frankly there was NO medical reality or any organic reality to the event that we expect to see. I wish it ended there. As demonized researcher Wolfgang Halbig clearly demonstrates in his book ‘Nobody Died At Sandy Hook’ there is no proof that the school was operable from a proper safety and maintenance perspective which is just as impossible as the missing medical reality and there is no tangible evidence that the school was full of children that day or at any point before that day dating back to 2008 since there was no internet service at the school since then. The deplorable maintenance condition of the school, like the missing medical reality alone throws a dark cloud of suspicion on the event. Add to that, all the actors caught on film rehearsing lines and people like crisis actor parent David Wheeler himself caught red-handed playing 2 distinct roles at the event including the role of a fake FBI agent.

And so for these and many other reasons I believe what I believe regarding Sandy Hook. Sandy Hook is a simple man’s conspiracy. You read, you watch the evidence and you simply call it as you see it and shut off the rhetoric and repetitious attacks. Right now there are millions of people around the world who would love to join Jones and support these fake parents if someone could provide that evidence that closes the deal. The evidence I (we) thirst for which is the essential ingredient for establishing truth would end all of this Sandy Hook circus. This is why I believe what I believe and this approach is the solution to Sandy Hook if you try it for yourself.

As the years go by, exposing Sandy Hook as a fake event is becoming easier and easier because the available evidence is so strong. The intriguing post-Sandy Hook persecution of truth however is much more fascinating to watch as the deep state protecting Sandy Hook explores new ways to silence, intimidate and censor Sandy Hook realists who are willing to speak the truth about what they observe. And that leads us to the final point. The entire reason for the Sandy Hook circus is to DETACH from the individual that which he/she SEES and objectively OBSERVES from that which he/she SPEAKS. The method by which this “detachment” is being implemented is by conditioning, using the tactic of intimidation and fear. In this tactic what one “speaks” regarding ones personal objective observation about that event is being translated from the harmless objective and sincere act of “true to thyself” to the act of “violence and harassment” against the families of the actors who are playing the role of parents. This false accusation and thus the potential consequences triggered by the accusation itself together form the bases of the intimidation and fear being generated by the behind-the-scenes Sandy Hook bullies.

Finally, this brand new sophisticated method for censoring truth, as I have been writing about for years, is the model for truth censorship for the future new world order. And THIS is potentially the number one reason that they executed the Sandy Hook event in the first place. If you understand this message please share with others.

Related videos


Remember the children


Subscribe to The Sleuth Journal Newsletter for Daily Articles!


The post Here’s Everything You Need to Know About the Alex Jones “Condolences” to Sandy Hook Parents (VIDEO) appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Former CIA Spy Who Carried out a False Flag Attack Talks about False Flag Terrorism (VIDEO)

 Former CIA Spy Who Carried out a False Flag Attack Talks about False Flag Terrorism (VIDEO) | steele | CIA False Flags Government Corruption Multimedia Propaganda Sleuth Journal Special Interests US News War Propaganda Whistle Blowers World News

“Most terrorists are false flag terrorists, or are created by our own security services. In the United States, every single terrorist incident we have had has been a false flag, or has been an informant pushed on by the FBI. In fact, we now have citizens taking out restraining orders against FBI informants that are trying to incite terrorism. We’ve become a lunatic asylum.”

– David Steele, the second-highest ranking civilian in the U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence and a former CIA clandestine services officer (source)

It’s a term we hear so often these days, ‘false flag terrorism.’ What is it?

Does it mean events didn’t actually happen? Does it mean no one died during the event? Was it a drill? Was a patsy involved? Did the government/FBI/CIA know about it? These are the big questions that create confusion amongst people when it comes to false flag terrorism.

When the recent Manchester and London attacks took place our first thought was ‘OK, this happened, but what really happened?’ Why has this become an early first thought for many? Because the evidence for false flag terror, and the sheer amount of times it has happened, has become grand in recent years.

How often do we step aside and question what we’re actually hearing the mainstream media put out? How often do we examine events for ourselves and use our own critical thinking skills instead of blindly believing what we’re told on mainstream media news outlets?

We must remember the CIA’s “Operation Mockingbird” was designed decades ago to infiltrate media and sway public opinion, and it still continues to this day.

So we decided to jump on the phone with Robert David Steele, an ex CIA Spy who has carried out a false flag attack himself. We caught up with him to ask him his thoughts and opinions about false flag terror and how to recognize false flag events.

This interview was also the focus of our latest episode in our CE docu-series below. You can watch the full Robert David Steele interview below as well.


Subscribe to The Sleuth Journal Newsletter for Daily Articles!


The post Former CIA Spy Who Carried out a False Flag Attack Talks about False Flag Terrorism (VIDEO) appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

‘When I say cut taxes, I don’t mean fiddle with the code. I mean abolish the income tax and the IRS, and replace them with nothing’

‘When I say cut taxes, I don’t mean fiddle with the code. I mean abolish the income tax and the IRS, and replace them with nothing’ | Ron-Paul-Quote-Facebook | Government IRS Ron Paul Sleuth Journal Special Interests

The quote in the headline comes from Ron Paul, and it should be the goal of every conservative lawmaker in the entire country.  When professional politicians tell you that they are in favor of reforming the tax code or reducing taxes a little bit, essentially what they are telling you is that they are perfectly fine with the status quo.  They may want to tweak things slightly, but in general they are content with big taxes, big spending and big government.  I spent an entire year getting a Master of Laws in Taxation at the University of Florida Law School, and in my opinion the best thing that Congress could do to the tax code would be to run it through a shredder and put it in a dumpster.  As I noted the other day, the tax code is now more than four million words long and it takes Americans about six billion dollars a year to comply with it.  Those that believe that they are offering the American people a “solution” by proposing to tinker with this abominable mess are just fooling themselves.

The only long-term solution that is going to work is to get rid of the entire steaming pile of garbage.  Ron Paul understood this, and we would be very wise to take his advice.  The following is the full version of the quote from the headline above…

“By the way, when I say cut taxes, I don’t mean fiddle with the code. I mean abolish the income tax and the IRS, and replace them with nothing.”

If I run for Congress, and I am very strongly leaning in that direction, this is what my position on taxes is going to be.

Of course we are going to have to dramatically change the composition of the House and the Senate in order to get this done, so in the short-term we may have to focus on reducing tax rates and the size of the tax code by as much as possible.

But ultimately, the goal will be to abolish the tax code and the IRS altogether.

We have become so accustomed to an income tax that many of us couldn’t possibly imagine a society without one.  But today there are seven states that do not have one, and that includes very big states such as Texas and Florida.  And from 1872 to 1913, there was no federal income tax.  When a federal income tax was finally reinstituted in 1913, the rates were extremely low.  The following comes from Politifact

The 1913 law imposed a tax of 1 percent on income up to $20,000, for both individual and joint filers. However, exemptions from the tax — the first $3,000 of income for individuals and the first $4,000 for joint filers — meant “virtually all middle-class Americans” were excused from paying, according to W. Elliot Brownlee’s book, Federal Taxation in America. The law also put in place a graduated surtax on incomes above $20,000; the highest rate paid, 7 percent, applied to Americans making more than $500,000 (about $11.4 million in 2011 dollars).

So how did things go for our country during the four decades when there was no federal income tax?

Well, if you regularly follow my work you already know the answer to that question.

That period of time just happened to be the best period of economic growth in U.S. history.

Oh, but we wouldn’t want to change from the way things work today, would we?  After all, the U.S. economy has grown at a blistering average yearly rate of just 1.33 percent over the past decade, and we are actually behind that pace so far in 2017.

If you want a no growth economy and a steadily shrinking middle class, then our current system is perfect for you.

But I believe that we can do so much better.

So how are we going to fund the federal government if we eliminate the income tax?

Well, the truth is that taxing individual incomes accounts for only 46.2 percent of all federal revenue.  The federal government has lots of other ways that it raises money, but of course we wouldn’t be able to keep the massively bloated federal bureaucracy that we have today.  We would need to reduce the size and scope of the federal government to an appropriate constitutional level, and of course most politicians on the left would resist this greatly.

There are some federal agencies and programs that we could completely eliminate altogether.  If it was up to me, the EPA, the Department of Education and the BATFE would be good places to start.  Any essential functions that they are currently performing could easily be absorbed by other agencies.

There are very few politicians in our entire country that will still talk like this, because our leaders have taken us so far down the road toward “a social state” that most Americans don’t even know what “limited government” looks like anymore.

I would like to share with you an old newspaper clipping that was posted to Facebook by Get Involved, You Live Here

‘When I say cut taxes, I don’t mean fiddle with the code. I mean abolish the income tax and the IRS, and replace them with nothing’ | Beware-The-Useful-Idiots-Facebook-460x475 | Government IRS Ron Paul Sleuth Journal Special Interests

Over the past several decades, the left has made a tremendous amount of progress toward achieving the goals that Saul Alinsky originally outlined in Rules for Radicals.  Obamacare was a giant step toward federal control over our healthcare system, poverty is exploding as the middle class shrinks, we are nearly 20 trillion dollars in debt, our public schools have become left-wing indoctrination centers, and God has been pushed out of almost every corner of public life.

We should be very thankful that we got Donald Trump instead of Hillary Clinton, but many radical leftists consider Trump to simply be a bump in the road on the way to completely eradicating our way of life.

They want to criminalize what we believe by making it “hate speech”, they want to steal the minds of the next generation by dominating our system of education, and they want to use government institutions and the legal system as tools to completely reshape society in their image.

The only way that we are going to defeat this tyranny is if we stand up and fight for our country, and that is precisely what we are going to do.


Subscribe to The Sleuth Journal Newsletter for Daily Articles!


The post ‘When I say cut taxes, I don’t mean fiddle with the code. I mean abolish the income tax and the IRS, and replace them with nothing’ appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS