US investigators wiretapped former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort under secret court orders before and after the election, sources tell CNN, an extraordinary step involving a high-ranking campaign official now at the center of the Russia meddling probe.
The government snooping continued into early this year, including a period when Manafort was known to talk to President Donald Trump.
…The surveillance was discontinued at some point last year for lack of evidence, according to one of the sources.
The FBI then restarted the surveillance after obtaining a new FISA warrant that extended at least into early this year.
Sources say the second warrant was part of the FBI’s efforts to investigate ties between Trump campaign associates and suspected Russian operatives. Such warrants require the approval of top Justice Department and FBI officials, and the FBI must provide the court with information showing suspicion that the subject of the warrant may be acting as an agent of a foreign power.
…The Justice Department and the FBI have denied that Trump’s own “wires” were tapped.
While Manafort has a residence in Trump Tower, it’s unclear whether FBI surveillance of him took place there.
Since Donald Trump began his run for President in June 2015, parts of the dominant liberal media have repeatedly parroted the incorrect claim that, in 1989, Trump ran a newspaper ad in which he urged the execution of a group of young black and Hispanic teens who ended up eventually being proven “innocent” in spite of confessing to the infamous rape and beating of a Central Park jogger that year.
In fact, the ad in question did not specify that the Central Park Five should be executed as it came at a time when the death penalty was illegal in New York. There had been a push for the state legislature to enact a new law to reinstate capital punishment which would require overriding the veto of then-Democratic Governor Mario Cuomo — who had vetoed a death penalty bill a month before the attack.
The defendants could not have been sentenced to capital punishment since it was not an option at the time of the crime.
Additionally, when Trump was asked about the ad in May 1989 on Larry King Live, CNN claims he stated that he only supported the death penalty for adults — which would have excluded the Central Park Five because they were all between the ages of 14 and 16.
In the repeated smearing of Trump as someone who advocated executing a group of children whose convictions were eventually vacated after they had served their sentences, the media have also simplistically portrayed the defendants as having been “exonerated” or proven completely “innocent” by DNA testing without informing viewers that even their defense attorneys admitted that they were “beating up other people” on the night of the Central Park attack.
In the film, The Central Park Five, as far-left film maker Ken Burns pushed a sympathetic view of the five teens, the documentary actually admitted that their defense attorneys had considered arguing that they could not have committed the attack on the jogger because they were busy “beating up other people” at the time. Their defense attorneys presumably had conceded that they were part of a group of dozens of teens who attacked as many as eight different random people in the park on the same night, including one man who received a skull fracture.
Also of note, as some have pushed the angle that, because the Central Park jogger was a white woman while the defendants were minorities, Trump was motivated by racism — but what has been overlooked is that he also came to the defense of a black woman in Brooklyn who was raped and thrown from a four-story building a couple of weeks after the Central Park attack, and right after the death penalty ads ran in May of that year.
One columnist credited Trump with drawing attention to the Brooklyn victim’s ordeal as he visited her in the hospital, spoke publicly of her case, and offered to pay her medical bills. According to Nexis, in the Herald Sun article, “Our Odd Reactions to Rape,” dated January 31, 1990, author P. Wilson recalled: “Most of the publicity about the case arose from the fact that Donald Trump, a wealthy developer, agreed to pay her medical costs.”
Trump also spoke of the Brooklyn attack in his May 1989 interview with Larry King.
As for the issue of the Central Park Five being “exonerated” or proven “innocent,” with some accounts even asserting that they were “acquitted,” such claims are an overstatement given that, after another man — convicted serial rapist Matias Reyes — in 2002 confessed to attacking the jogger in 1989 and claimed that he did it alone, there was never another trial to determine their guilt. After DNA testing linked Reyes to the crime, the city’s prosecution chose to vacate the convictions for all five.
<<< Please support MRC’s NewsBusters team with a tax-deductible contribution today. >>>
Since there really is a phenomenon that people sometimes confess to offenses they did not commit, it would seem feasible either that the Central Park Five were pressured into confessing to a crime they did not commit, or that Reyes — who apparently had nothing to lose by confessing — falsely claimed that he was the only assailant who took part in the attack.
It is possible that a jury would have found them not guilty if they had had the benefit of Reyes’s testimony at the time, but, as they had already served their sentences, they were not tried again, and the sentences were simply vacated.
As for the significance of DNA testing, the DNA samples found at the scene confirmed that Reyes was at least one of the attackers, but it did not on its own prove that others could not have been involved in the attack. The testimony by Reyes that he was the lone attacker was what raised doubts about the Central Park Five conviction. Some media accounts have misleadingly suggested that DNA testing “proved” that the Central Park Five were “innocent.”
Media accounts have also mostly excluded the views of figures like former New York City prosecutor Linda Fairstein and Michael Armstrong — an attorney who headed an investigation into how the NYPD handled the Central Park Five case. During the lawsuit that the Central Park Five brought against the city over their imprisonment, Fairstein complained that prosecutors in the case were under a gag order, making them unable to speak freely to the media about their views of the case.
Additionally, Armstrong complained about film maker Burns not including his views on the case in his documentary which misleadingly notes in a disclaimer that prosecutors declined to participate. His investigation had concluded that the NYPD had acted appropriatedly in its handling the Central Park rape case, and promoted the theory that the Central Park Five were part of the attack on the jogger.
Also not given much attention was the argument that Mayor Bill Di Blasio made a political decision to push for a generous settlement for the Central Park Five against the advice of the city’s attorneys, casting doubt on whether the large payout was deserved.
Much of the dominant media — especially on MSNBC and CNN — have repeatedly brought up the issue — even more so over the past year and in the weeks after the Charlottesville violence. And in the past week, MSNBC hosts and regular guests have been revisiting the topic again — including hosts Chris Hayes and Al Sharpton, and frequent guest Karine Jean-Pierre of MoveOn.org.
Pompeo made the claim in a letter to Harvard expressing his displeasure at the Ivy League school’s decision to make “American traitor” Manning a visiting fellow. Harvard subsequently reversed its decision.
Manning “betrayed her country” by leaking classified information to WikiLeaks, Pompeo said, explaining the whistleblowing website was both an enemy of the US and “akin to a hostile foreign intelligence service.”
The CIA director claimed Manning “stands against everything the brave men and women I serve alongside stand for,” and pointed out he was not referring to Manning being transgender, just “her identity as a traitor” to the US.
Manning served the US “with disgrace,” Pompeo said, and “violated the warrior ethos she promised to uphold,” by whistleblowing on the US actions in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Pompeo was soon called a hypocrite given his past praise of WikiLeaks. The former Kansas congressman appeared to be a big fan of the whistleblowing organization last July, tweeting about the DNC emails published by WikiLeaks.
Pompeo tweeted details from both the DNC emails and emails from Hillary Clinton’s Campaign Chair John Podesta during the 2016 election to criticize Clinton, as evidenced by archivedversions of his comments. Both tranches of emails were published by WikiLeaks.
Assange appeared to be trolling Pompeo and his “cry-bully complaint,” tweeting the CIA head had been “triggered” by Harvard’s decision.
Pompeo made similar statements about WikiLeaks in April at a Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) event in Washington, claiming WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and his associates were “demons.”
“It’s time to call out WikiLeaks for what it really is, a non-state hostile intelligence service, often abetted by state actors like Russia,” he said.
Mesquite, TX — As the Free Thought Project reported earlier this year, police were caught on video tasering a young man’s testicles and his body — until he died. Then, in June we learned that although the Dallas County District Attorney Faith Johnson found that the officers involved had committed a crime during their torture — they cannot be charged. Now, to add insult to unaccountable injury and death, according to court documents released this week, the cops are defending their tactics, calling their torturous acts that fateful night, standard procedure.
Last week, Mesquite police officers Jack Fyall, Richard Houston, Alan Gafford, Zachary Scott, William Heidelburg and Bill Hedgpeth, the ones responsible for the death of Graham Dyer, asked the judge to dismiss the lawsuit brought against them by his Dyer’s parents.
“If I could go back in time and have this case, it would be indicted,” said Michael Snipes, the first assistant district attorney. “We would have pursued criminally negligent homicide charges.”
These charges cannot be brought now, however, because — in spite of the family only recently finding out about their son’s horrifying death — cops kept the footage of it secret long enough for the statute of limitations to expire.
As My Statesmen reported in June, such charges cannot be brought more than three years after the incident, which came to the district attorney’s attention as the result of an American-Statesman investigation earlier in the year. And while there is no such limitation on the higher charge of manslaughter, Snipes said the officers’ behavior that contributed to Graham’s death didn’t reach the level of a knowing disregard for his life.
On August 14, 2013, Kathy and Robert Dyer got a phone call one night that is every parent’s nightmare — their son, Graham, was in the hospital. The 18-year-old boy had been severely injured during a struggle with police and was fighting for his life — a fight he would lose.
When Kathy and Robert got to the hospital that night, police refused to let them see their son. “They said he was in serious trouble — that he had felony charges for assaulting an officer,” Kathy recalled.
Graham had taken LSD that night and his friends called police after he had a bad reaction to it. Police claimed Graham injured himself as they drove him to jail. While the video does show Graham flailing back and forth, police failed to mention to the parents that they’d tortured him, repeatedly, with a taser — including deploying it on his genitalia.
Although this tragic incident happened in 2013 Kathy and Robert are only now finding out what happened to their son. For more than two years, the Mesquite police department would keep the video of Graham — before he went to the hospital — a secret. Now, after watching the video, we know why.
Thanks to the work of Eric Dexheimer at Austin’s MyStatesman, the Dyer’s story is now being told. And although the Mesquite police department won’t face charges for their horrifying actions, they are getting some much-deserved negative attention.
As MyStatesman reported in April:
It seemed improbable the five officers who’d brought him in couldn’t safely subdue Graham. The youngest of the Dyers’ three children was small and slight — 5-foot-4, 110 pounds. He was a skateboarder, not a linebacker.
As the morning passed, a series of scans showed Graham’s brain activity slowing to a stop. “The worst day ever,” Kathy said. Their son’s autopsy said he died of self-inflicted head injuries — an accident, the medical examiner concluded.
Even in the dark days following their son’s death, the Dyers tended to believe the police. Why wouldn’t they? Kathy, a civil engineer, and Robert, a teacher, were solid citizens.
Even though they were originally inclined to believe police, Dyer’s parents continued to ask more and more questions, like what were all those “chicken feet” scratches all over Graham’s body? Or, why did the emergency room doctor’s notes say Graham appeared to be a victim of assault?
However, when Kathy and Robert went down to the Mesquite police department, they were not given answers to any of their questions — because police weren’t required to answer any of them.
According to the ridiculous state law, police departments aren’t required to hand over records for any incidents that don’t result in a conviction. Since police killed Graham before he was able to stand trial for his alleged crimes, they were shielded from handing over the evidence.
For years, the Dyers would fight to get this information from police. Eventually, because of their persistence, the Dyers finally obtained the video footage from their son’s last hours alive. When they viewed it for the first time, they realized everything police said that happened that night was a lie.
Those chicken feet scratches, they would learn, were from taser prongs.
The family hired Susan Hutchison to build a civil rights case against the department. During her investigation, horrifying details emerged.
As My Statesman reports, Hutchison said the additional information contained more troubling details about Graham’s interaction with the police. Taser records indicated four officers shocked him multiple times, she said. As Graham is being stunned with a Taser in the back seat of the cruiser, one can be heard saying: “Mother[expletive], I’m going to kill you.”
And kill him they did.
At one point in the horrifying video, an officer is seen sadistically deploying the taser directly on Graham’s penis. It’s as if these officers enjoyed causing harm to this clearly distressed boy.
When asked about the use of the tasers, the department wrote it off as standard procedure.
“A Taser was deployed in an effort to control decedent, prevent escape and prevent him from injuring himself,” the city stated in court documents, adding the officer had been aiming for Graham’s leg and it was dark.
In newly released court filings this week, the officer seen shocking Graham in the groin explains that what appears to be occurring in the video isn’t what really happened, according to the Statesmen. And the officer who issued the death threat dismisses it as a “control tactic.”
However, in the video, we can clearly see the cop hold the taser to Graham’s genitals. This is, by no means, standard procedure to ‘prevent suspects from hurting themselves.’
Police are now attempting to deny reality and claim that despite video evidence showing them taser the young man in the genitals, they never tasered the young man in the genitals.
In an affidavit describing his recollection of what occurred that night, Gafford, a 17-year police veteran, stated that no matter what appears to be happening in the video, he didn’t shock Graham in the crotch, according to a report out of the Statesman.
“I attempted to apply (my) Taser in a drive stun mode to stop his violent resistance and ended up tasing him in the upper thigh,” Gafford wrote. “Although the night vision video camera appears to depict this was in the groin area, it was the upper inner thigh.”
Scott, a police officer for 7 years, added that when he said, “I’m going to kill you,” it was only an attempt to control the teenager.
“I used harsh language during that stop out of frustration and also as a control tactic as I have learned that sometimes harsh language will get a person’s attention and achieve some cooperation,” he wrote. “Unfortunately, it did not work with Mr. Dyer.”
Even with this lawsuit, the Dyers keep hitting roadblocks in holding these cops accountable, like the statute of limitations protecting the criminal cops who killed their son.
As Hutchison said, police departments “In effect, have complete immunity and no accountability—at least in Texas.”
The Dyers aren’t even going after money. As My Statesman reports, Robert said his goal for the lawsuit is modest: “I just want them to say they fucked up.”
“I’m not saying doing LSD wasn’t stupid,” Kathy said. “And things happen. But this should have never happened.”
In spite of this selfless family getting railroaded by the corrupt system, they have taken action to make sure this doesn’t happen to other families.
As the Statesmen reports, Kathy and Robert testified in front of legislators in support of a bill that could help other families in their position.
Sponsored by Rep. Joe Moody, D-El Paso, House Bill 3234 would have compelled law enforcement agencies to release their investigative records if, like Graham, the suspect had died, or, if not, gave his consent to their release. The couple’s emotional testimony appeared to move several of the lawmakers on the state House Committee on Government Transparency and Operation.
However, thanks to the police state worship in Texas, the bill only made it out of committee and then died.
The family has now pledged that they will fight to the end for justice.
Source Article from http://thefreethoughtproject.com/genitals-taser-standard-procedure/
A new video from WeatherWar101.com claims that Hurricane Irma is a “man-made storm system” that was deliberately created or augmented through weather weaponization technology. The video is shown below in case you’re curious why so many people find this explanation so fascinating.
As we have stated previously, we remain skeptical of such claims. We cover this because of the growing number of people who are curious about weather modification and “geoengineering” technology that really does exist. For example, Geoengineering Watch has published a list of 175 patents that prove beyond any doubt that weather modification / weaponization technology is not only quite real; it’s also recognized and granted patentsby the United States government. Any person who claims that weather weaponization technology does not exist is either ignorant or lying.
While there’s no question that all “official” sources would categorize weather modification claims as being a “hoax” or a “myth,” intelligent readers also know that nearly every official source is constantly lying to the public. All “official sources” on vaccines, for example, are constantly lying about vaccine composition and vaccine safety. All “official sources” on agricultural chemicals are constantly lying about the safety vs. risk of toxic chemical exposure. All “official sources” on the environment are systematically lying to you about global warming and climate change. This doesn’t necessarily mean that the NOAA, for example, is lying about hurricanes, but we do know the NOAA has been caught red-handed faking global warming temperature data. Thus, the credibility of all official sources is practically zero at this point. The NOAA is a scientifically dishonest organization, in other words. They fabricate data to fit their fake science political narratives. (Factually stated, the NOAA is a group of dishonest conspiracy theorists who fabricate data to present a science hoax to the world called “global warming.”)
At the same time, that conclusion doesn’t automatically mean every alternative explanation is factually correct. That’s why we advise readers to think for themselves and learn as much science as you can so that you can participate in the debates and discussions. (Most people literally do not know that there are 1,000 milligrams in a gram, so that’s the level of scientific illiteracy we’re seeing across society these days. When you try to talk to people about the basics of meteorology, such as barometric pressure, air density, condensation, the Coriolis effect, solar radiation and so on, they are completely lost.)
See the new video from WeatherWar101 and decide for yourself
The new video from WeatherWar101 offers a detailed explanation of what its creators claim is the “manmade storm system” known as Hurricane Irma. To delve further into this subject, check out the WeatherWar101 channel on YouTube for more videos.
The video explains that accelerated water evaporation is artificially created in specific sequences to grow the storm into something much more powerful and dangerous than it would have become on its own. Here’s the full video to see for yourself:
And here’s a previous video about Hurricane Irma from about a week ago:
Even “mainstream” scientists acknowledge weather modification technology
As the following video shows, even “mainstream” scientists like Michio Kaku are openly talking about weather modification technology being used to alter storms and augment rainfall.
“By firing trillion-Watt lasers, you rip apart the electrons creating what are called ions, and these ions act like seeds, like dust particles, bringing down rain and even lightning,” Kaku explains in this CBS News interview:
As Kaku explains, weather modification technology exists right now and is well known across the scientific community. Its existence isn’t a “conspiracy theory” or a “hoax.” Any person who isn’t aware of the existence of such technology is simply misinformed and willfully ignorant.
Disagreement across the weather modification / geoengineering community
Since first covering this topic, we’ve come to understand that there are warring factions inside the weather modification / geoengineering community. Some of the key players claim other players are “controlled opposition,” for example, and there’s already been misinformation swirling around about our own interest in this subject.
So for the record, here’s our current position and activity in this realm:
- We’ve invited Dane Wigington of Geoengineering Watch for an interview. I don’t yet know if he has agreed to be interviewed, but if he does, we’ll set up a schedule and interview him via video or audio.
- We’ve sent a list of interview questions to WeatherWar101 and are waiting for a reply. We hope to be able to publish the text of that interview shortly. We’ve also invited WeatherWar101 for an audio or video interview, but they prefer to answer questions by email.
- We are sharing videos with the public in the interest of public curiosity and education. It turns out that a key video we published in a previous article was ripped off from the original creator, and we therefore sent a lot of viewership traffic to the wrong YouTube channel (unknowingly). This was not intended, and we’re working to make sure we give proper credit and links to the original creators of these videos.
We’ve also launched our own news aggregation site where we are covering these investigators and analysts: Geoengineering.news will work to bring you more frequent news from the key players in this space, and we’ll link to their articles and videos in every story. We don’t have a weather expert on staff, so we’ll be primarily just covering other analysts who are experts in this field.
In the mean time, watch the videos above and decide for yourself. As this gets more popular, watch for some official source to “officially” denounce geoengineering analysts as “conspiracy theorists.” That’s when you know the analysts have actually hit the nail on the head. No news story should be fully believed, the saying goes, until it is officially denied by the government.
If only Jim Marrs were still alive, he’d be having a field day with all this…
What do I believe about all this, personally speaking? I believe that I’m not the expert in this area and I haven’t reached a solid conclusion yet. However, I do know that exotic technologies exist which are fully capable of weather modification and augmentation. That is not in doubt. I also know that globalist powers turn every technology into a weapon sooner or later, just as they did with atomic energy. Much like you, I’ll keep watching this topic and see what emerges.
Via Natural News
Featured Image: Visible-wavelength satellite image of Hurricane Irma as of 15Z (11 am EDT) Monday, September 4, 2017. Image credit: RAMMB/CIRA @ CSU.
The upcoming federal elections in Germany later in September are extremely vulnerable to hacking according to multiple cyber security researchers, who claim that even with prior warning, the elections could become a “total loss.”
“The number of possible attacks and the severity of the vulnerabilities exceed our worst fears,”said Linus Neumann, spokesperson for the white hat hacking group the Chaos Computer Club (CCC).
Neumann claims that a sophisticated hack is not even necessary, citing a “one-click compromise” to manipulate results.
In federal elections in Germany, votes are cast using pen and paper and are then initially counted by hand but results could be manipulated by hackers as the totals from each constituency are broadcast and tallied up at a national level, predominantly using a piece of software known as PC Wahl.
Martin Tschirsich, a 29-year-old IT scientist, discovered a glaring vulnerability in the PC Wahl software.
“At some point, the results need to be typed in somewhere. And from then on, a lot of things can happen digitally,” Tschirsich told Spiegel Online.
The final results are said to be more difficult to tamper with, although the preliminary figures can be falsified, creating a false impression.
“If the final result was manipulated, it would be discovered immediately,” Tschirsich conceded.
While each state has its own specific preliminary voting rules and employs various methods to transmit them using the PC Wahl or equivalent software, telephone or even fax, the president of the Federal Statistical Office (Destatis), Dieter Sarreither, claims such manipulation would be “extremely unlikely,” reports The Local.
Despite the advanced warning, as 61.5 million eligible voters go to the polls at approximately 70,000 polling stations across the country on September 24, the integrity of Germany’s quasi-digital voting system has been severely undermined before a single vote has been cast.
The CCC pulled no punches in their independent analysis of Tschirsich’s claims, asserting that there are “a number of security problems and multiple practicable attack scenarios” in which “a state-funded team of hackers is not even necessary” to change the “vote totals across electoral district and state boundaries.”
A separate analysis carried out in the Netherlands on its voting software, IVU.elect, yielded similarly damning results, the CCC said.
“It is simply not the right millenium to quietly ignore IT-security problems in voting… Effective protective measures have been available for decades, there is no conceivable reason not to use them,” Neumann said.
Science, and in particular health science, has entered a new era. Since the emergence of powerful corporations who put profit before all else, science has, as the editor-in-chief of the Lancet stated a few years ago, “taken a turn towards darkness.” This has been the topic of discussion among many health professionals and scientists throughout the years, and numerous publications have also emerged showing the need for immediate attention, but it’s still something that has yet to be discussed or even publicized as it should within the mainstream. You can read more about that in an article we published regarding “peer-reviewed” science, and what that really means today, here.
As a result, debates regarding various aspects that surround our human experience have emerged in abundance, and one of the most sensitive areas deals with our food — what we eat, how we eat it, and if what we’ve been taught for the past few decades is actually accurate. Given historical trends, it’s probably not, as the only constant of human knowledge and learning is that it changes and adapts all the time. Could the health benefits of eggs fit into the same category?
Recent studies over the past few years have been giving vegetarianism as well as veganism more credibility in the eyes of mainstream science. As Harvard Medical School recognizes, “Studies are confirming the health benefits of meat-free eating. Nowadays, plant-based eating is recognized as not only nutritionally sufficient but also as a way to reduce the risk for many chronic illnesses.”
The plethora of data that’s emerged has also justified the use of these findings in a clinical setting, and many doctors are now urging their patients to adopt a plant-based diet to treat and avoid several diseases, including heart disease and diabetes.
Take for example Michelle McMacken, an Assistant Professor of Medicine at NYU School of Medicine and the Director of the Bellevue Hospital Weight Management Clinic. She reveals the grim reality of trying to treat disease without addressing diet:
“Day in and day out, I treated symptoms and blood test results related to diabetes, heart disease, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, fatty liver, osteoarthritis, and peripheral vascular disease — but I rarely got to the common root of these conditions. My approach was usually reactive rather than proactive. My patients didn’t get much better – the best I felt I could hope for was that their disease state was ‘managed’ and didn’t get worse.”
“Like most physicians,” she continues, she “had little to no nutrition instruction during [her] training, and [she] felt ill equipped to counsel” her patients with regard to their food.
But she did her research, attended conferences with like-minded practitioners, and has since seen an enormous change:
“The results have been nothing short of tremendous, both for my patients and for me personally. No longer do I automatically reach for the prescription pad when I see a patient with diabetes and high cholesterol. . . . In just a short time, I’ve seen many patients avoid or decrease medications, prevent diabetes, lose weight, and reduce their cardiovascular risk by moving towards or fully adopting a plant-based diet.”
Another example is Kim A. Williams, M.D., the former President of the American College of Cardiology who also adopted a vegan diet. He often sees patients who are overweight and struggling with hypertension, type 2 diabetes, and high cholesterol. One of the things he advises them to do specifically is to go vegan. He is also the Chairman of Cardiology at Rush University Medical Center in Chicago. His enthusiasm for a planet-based diet comes from his interpretation of medical literature, having investigated several studies proving that people who pursue vegetarian diets live longer than meat eaters and have lower rates of death from heart disease, diabetes, and kidney problems.
The list of studies and practitioners is long, so if you’re of the belief that a vegan or vegetarian diet is or can be harmful, the truth of the matter is, there is no scientific basis to support it. As far as what humans are “meant” to eat, that’s also a major debate within the scientific community, yet we are presented with one perspective from a young age, and proponents of the evolution theory also seem to use that argument quite a bit. An article by Rob Dunn written for Scientific American titled “Human Ancestors Were Nearly All Vegetarians” explores this issue from an evolutionary perspective, revealing how our guts might be evolved to perform best on a vegetarian diet. This perspective also complements all of the science that is emerging today.
The fact is, people go plant based for a number of reasons. These include losing weight, reducing their risk of heart disease, decreasing the number of pills they have to take, increasing their energy levels, and more. There are several reasons, and if you’re curious, here are nine things that happen when you stop eating meat.
What About Eggs? Can They Really Be Compared to Cigarettes?
According to the perspectives presented above, eggs would fit into the same category. They have been promoted as both healthy and unhealthy at various stages, so perhaps moderation is the best answer? It’s difficult to say, particularly when you have multiple studies condemning the consumption of eggs, linking them to cancer and heart disease, and others praising the consumption of eggs, showing complete opposite results.
For example, a study published in 2011 found that daily consumption of cholesterol appeared to cut a woman’s life short as much as smoking 25 thousand cigarettes, or 5 cigarettes a day for 15 years.
Following up on their research a year later, a study published in the Journal of Atherosclerosis Research found that regular egg consumption could put your health at grave risk. Canadian researchers examined 1,231 patients with an average age of 62. They used ultrasound measurements of the carotid arteries to establish the presence and quantity of atherosclerotic plaque. Smoking was measured in “pack-years” and egg yolk consumption in “egg yolk-years.” The researchers discovered that eating one egg per day was just as bad for your heart as smoking five cigarettes per day.
A more recent study conducted by researchers at Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital followed more than 130,000 people for 36 years, monitoring illnesses, lifestyles, diets, and mortality rates.
They found that substituting between 15g and 19g of animal protein, the equivalent of a single sausage, for legumes, pulses, nuts, and other planet protein, significantly decreased the risk of early death. Replacing eggs with plant-based protein also led to a 19% reduction in death risk.
Researchers found that a 10% higher intake of meat was associated with a 2% higher mortality rate and an 8% higher chance of cardiovascular death.
According to Dr. T. Colin Campbell, known for his work on the “China Study“:
“What I did during the early part of my career was nothing more than what traditional science would suggest. I made the observation that diets presumably higher in animal protein were associated with liver cancer in the Philippines. When coupled with the extraordinary report from India showing that casein fed to experimental rats at the usual levels of intake dramatically promoted liver cancer, it prompted my 27-year-long study The China Project, of how this effect worked. We did dozens of experiments to see if this was true and, further, how it worked.”
In the study, Campbell emphasizes his use of traditional criteria to decide what is a carcinogen (in regards to animal-based proteins) from the government’s chemical carcinogenesis testing program. Campbell also stated that, “this is not a debatable subject and the implications of this conclusion are staggering in so many ways.”
The study also showed that animal protein is very acidic, forcing the body to leach calcium and phosphorus from the bones to neutralize the acidity.
Other Factors to Consider, Beyond Science
Scientific fraud is another important issue to consider. While there is some science showing that certain nutrients found within eggs are healthy, that doesn’t take away from the fact that consumption of eggs is doing other things in the body, too. It reminds me of blood pressure pills, for example. Yes, they reduce blood pressure, but they also create a cascade of other negative health effects, much like statins for heart problems do.
Scientific fraud is seen at all levels, from dangerous prescription drugs being pushed onto the market to the FDA manipulating media and science press and approving foods as safe for consumption without adequate study. There are countless examples here to choose from. What we have today is an inundation of corporately influenced science.
Today, if studies are funded by big food corporations, and many of them are, we’re most likely looking at advertising rather than actual science. This is why it’s so important to consider the unbiased studies that are emerging every day that entirely contradict government nutritional guidelines.
When it comes to uncovering fraud, as linked just above, there are multiple examples. When it comes to the egg industry specifically, Dr. Michael Greger is the one to consult. He’s an American physician, author, and professional speaker on health issues. He used the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to uncover how public perception can be manipulated so that food corporations profit. Take a look.
For more short videos on eggs, the industry, and the science, made by Greger, you can visit this page of his website.
How Eggs Are Mass Produced
Another thing to consider is animal cruelty. While there are some humane egg farmers, when it comes to the eggs we most commonly find in fast food restaurants and grocery stores, this is the harsh reality.
The following video by activist Erin Janus perfectly depicts what’s wrong with the way eggs are mass produced.
IMAGE CREDIT:valengilda / 123RF Stock Photo
I am Luke Miller, content manager at Truth Theory and creator of Potential For Change. I like to blend psychology and spirituality to help you create more happiness in your life.Grab a copy of my free 33 Page Illustrated eBook- Psychology Meets Spirituality- Secrets To A Supercharged Life You Control Here
[8/29/17/ MIKE ADAMS] We’re bringing this claim to your attention because a growing number of observers, websites and analysts are concluding that Hurricane Harvey was “engineered” and made into a “weather weapon” through a combination of ground-based temperature manipulation tools and “chemtrail” seeding.
Yes, it sounds absurd at first, until you realize that Al Gore tells us that human activity controls the climate every day. It’s called “climate change,” and in fact, Al Gore and the climate alarmists directly tell us that we created Hurricane Harvey and all the other “extreme” weather events anyone sees. Weather modification, in other words, has become the de facto belief of climate alarmists. The entire mainstream media routinely insists that hurricanes, droughts, floods, snowstorms and tornadoes are all unintentionally created by human activity.
The key difference between Al Gore and the “weather wars” theories is that those who believe in weather wars insist these hurricanes are deliberately created, selectively amplified and steered into selected targets. Al Gore believes hurricanes are created by Man, in other words, and the weather wars theorists say they are precisely controlled and deployed as weapons of terrorism to inflict economic damage and achieve psychological goals involving terror and death. This claim seems absurd to most people at first glance, but there is a growing community of weather skeptics who insist that such events are not accidents but weapons. That’s why we’re covering this story: Not as an endorsement of such conclusions but rather as a look at a curious corner of the internet where weather wars, weather modification and geoengineering have become popular, alternative explanations for significant weather events. In fact, there are at least two key patents(linked below) that describe this technology in great detail, including a “space-based power system” that can alter “weather elements” including hurricanes. (Keep reading for details…)
One of the most popular sites asserting such claims is WeatherWar101.com, whose author — a former network engineer — explains:
For ten years, I have been proving the irrefutable reality of daily manufactured flash flood deluge and severe weather – every single day. Denying the reality of these daily manmade weather events is akin to denying the existence of the combustion engine, and it is just as easy to prove. If you can understand boiling water, you can understand where trillions of gallons of water vapor come from that create and fuel the daily trillion-gallon floods we see washing a different community away, somewhere in the world. This isn’t debatable, and it is as easy to observe as sunrise.
Unless I have the names mixed up, the author seems to go by the name of “Sofia Smallstorm” (to avoid being identified by name, of course) and goes to great lengths to protect his or her identity. This person also wrote the foreward to No Natural Weather: Introduction to Geoengineering 101.
The site has published a 14-minute analysis of Hurricane Harvey, asserting that the hurricane was augmented by “On-Land Water Vapor Generation from Texas, Louisiana, etc.” The video description also states, “It’s also no coincidence that Hurricane Harvey is hitting the United States, 25 years to the day after Hurricane Andrew hit Florida. Since all of these storms are very clearly and very obviously deliberated manufactured, this “Anniversary Hurricane” was clearly intentional.”
Another video from APlaneTruth.info offers a more detailed explanation of “weather geoengineering” phenomena and how they say it relates to Hurricane Harvey, citing numerous patents, weather control conference, military technology and so on:
Do water vapor generators exist that can unleash clouds?
The idea of land-based water vapor generators that could contribute any meaningful amount of water to Hurricane Harvey seems absurd to those who have never looked into all this. According to recent estimates, Hurricane Harvey dumped 11 trillion gallons of water on Houston and surrounding areas. For any land-based machinery to contribute even 1/1000th of that volume — just 11 billion gallons of water — would take a massive fleet of mechanized water vapor generators burning through an enormous quantity of fuel or electricity. That seems unrealistic by any rational analysis.
Yet as the BBC video shows in the following video clip (starting at 15:12), there do exists large buildings that literally generate massive clouds and rainfall. Before I saw this video, even I had no idea such buildings existed. Watch the BBC explain:
Despite the existence of the technology, it is difficult to imagine the existence of such a massive operation operating covertly. That’s why the existence of a large-scale water vapor generating network seems highly unlikely. Besides, solar power does all that work for free by warming the oceans and evaporating water into the storm system. Trying to augment 11 trillion gallons of water evaporation carried out by the sun seems futile. The forces of nature are so much larger than anything mankind can contribute to them that supposing we can generate massive storm systems seems rather unlikely.
At the same time, so does the idea that human activity can drastically alter Earth’s climate in the first place. Despite all the hysteria and fear mongering of the climate change alarmists, human activity is nothing but a tiny sliver of contribution to the grand-scale phenomena driven by solar activity, volcanoes and other such events.
Weather modification technology does exist (read these patents to see for yourself)
There’s no question, by the way, that weather modification technology exists and is in widespread use across the globe. Weather control advocates are currently citing this U.S. patent #20100074390 A1, titled, “Method for weather modification and vapor generator for weather modification.”
As the patent summary states:
A nuclear fusion reactor (2) or nuclear fission reactor (22) is used as a heat source. A heat exchanger (11 or 37) that contains water to be heated (15) is used for water vapor generation. A circulating pipe (10 or 26) through which a fluid for cooling the nuclear fusion reactor or nuclear fission reactor or for conducting heat exchange circulates is disposed so as to extend in the heat exchanger and be in contact with the water to be heated. Water vapor is thus generated. This water vapor is jetted toward the sky at a state of collimation through a vapor discharge pipe (12 or 36). A cloud for blocking sunlight is formed in the sky from the water vapor jetted to reduce the temperature of the earth surface. This enables a weather modification without discharging any greenhouse gas, e.g., CO2.
Another U.S. patent (#20100224696 A1) is entitled, “Weather management using space-based power system.” It describes a space-based technology for generating and controlling hurricanes:
Space-based power system and method of altering weather using space-born energy. The space-based power system maintains proper positioning and alignment of system components without using connecting structures. Power system elements are launched into orbit, and the free-floating power system elements are maintained in proper relative alignment, e.g., position, orientation, and shape, using a control system. Energy from the space-based power system is applied to a weather element, such as a hurricane, and alters the weather element to weaken or dissipate the weather element. The weather element can be altered by changing a temperature of a section of a weather element, such as the eye of a hurricane, changing airflows, or changing a path of the weather element.
Weather modification technology isn’t a conspiracy theory, either: It’s already in use! For example, this article from SingularityHub describes Dubai’s “weather wizards” and how they use advanced electronics to create rain. It’s not a conspiracy theory; it’s just clever physics:
Meteo Systems, a Swiss company [is] developing a technology they’ve dubbed Weathertec. The idea is to erect giant ionizers wherever you’d like to have some rain. If the ambient humidity in the area reaches the required minimum of 30%, then you turn the ionizers on and start pumping electrons into the atmosphere. Assuming that you have high temperatures, the electrons will rise with the heat and water molecules will start condensing around them. At this point, you have clouds that will produce rain once they are dense enough.
Adding to the intrigue of all this, Bill Gates announced serious funding for “seawater-spraying cloud machines” designed to generate rain-producing weather systems for targeted communities. As Inhabitat.com explains:
The Microsoft founder recently announced plans to invest $300,000 into research at the University of Calgary for unique solutions and responses to climate change. Part of that research included lab tests on machines that suck up seawater and spray it into the air, seeding white clouds that reflect rays of sunlight away from Earth. Silver Lining’s floating machines can suck up ten tons of water per second. If all goes well, Silver Lining plans to test the process with 10 ships spread throughout 3800 square miles of ocean.
By the way, that was seven years ago, in 2010. Do such weather-generating fleets already exist? If so, they’ve been kept very quiet.
Another popular site that reports on Geoengineering, by the way, is Geoengineering Watch by Dane Wigington. Very informative and interesting. Check it out.
The history of hurricanes shows that Mother Nature generates them without any human engineering at all
Creating rainfall, however, is a far cry from generating a hurricane and steering it onto an intended target. That idea would likely be considered outlandish by meteorologists and scientists. The far more likely explanation, of course, is that the coriolus effect — a derivative of a spinning globe — causes rotational forces in the atmosphere that spin storm systems one way in the Northern hemisphere and the opposite way in the Southern hemisphere. (That’s why hurricanes look like opposites of each other when comparing Northern vs. Southern hemisphere storms.) Solar-heated ocean water results in large-scale water evaporation, saturating the air with vapor. That vapor condenses due to changes in temperature or pressure, causing the formation of water droplets which are now heavier than air and therefore fall to the ground. With enough solar energy, natural forces can generate truly catastrophic storms.
To think that every major storm is a “weather weapon” generated by a nefarious operation seems far-fetched to me. But then again, so does Al Gore and all his nonsense prognostications from his quack science Church of Climatology. Nevertheless, “altering” or “steering” hurricanes is technically a far easier task than generating them wholesale. What some of the weather wars people are saying is not that the hurricanes are generated wholly by artificial systems but rather that they are “steered” or “influenced” in terms of their direction or intensity. Is that really possible? Multiple patents obviously say it is, and the U.S. patent office didn’t reject those patents, interestingly.
On the other side of the argument, history has recorded dozens of hurricanes striking Gulf Coast regions over the last century. Most of these hurricanes took place long before the rise of modern technology or exotic weather modification capabilities. So how are all these hurricanes explained? (Answer: Natural phenomena.)
Conclusion: Keep asking questions and stay curious, but also think critically
My conclusion in all this? Creative, critical thinking is a healthy practice, and I always encourage people to keep asking questions and challenge official explanations for everything. We do know we’re all constantly lied to by the fake news media about almost everything, from vaccines to economics to history. And don’t forget the “Russia! Russia! Russia!” conspiracy theory that’s been pushed by the fake news media for the last 18 months, based on absolutely nothing but faked sources and shoddy journalism.
If there’s anything I can say about the weather wars websites and commentators, it’s that I applaud all efforts to challenge current paradigms with clear thinking, and I readily admit I’m no expert in weather modification technology. Perhaps there are things I will learn in the future that will change my own view on this subject. Until then, I hope to encourage critical thinking about everything, which means that I don’t believe anything by default.
The mainstream media is lying to us all the time. Most of what’s labeled “mainstream science” is often just a consensus collection of corporation-induced lies. Mainstream medicine is a corruption racket shrouded in fake science and media propaganda. You are right to question everything for the simple reason that almost everything you’re told is complete bulls##t. Yet that doesn’t justify believing every alternative theory, either. You need to think critically about which theories you believe vs. reject. For example, I’ve publicly stated that the Flat Earth theorists are flat-out wrong (although they do offer a fun thought experiment to play with). I also think Ray Kurzweil’s singularity is a misguided pipe dream rooted in self-delusion and an unhealthy God complex.
Can hurricanes be artificially generated in totality? Almost certainly not. Can they be steered into intended targets? It seems incredibly unlikely, but within the realm of technical feasibility. Does weather modification technology exist? Absolutely, yes. But that doesn’t mean that every weather event is a nefarious plot. We live on a dynamic, chaotic planet that’s home to all sorts of bizarre natural phenomena. Although I know as a fact that the status quo can fake the news, brainwash the masses and pull off massive false flag events, I very much doubt they can fake entire hurricanes.
Do you have a different take on all this? Do your research. Think critically. Don’t believe everything you read, view or hear. Most importantly, make up your own mind and don’t let the establishment tell you what’s true, because the establishment is lying to you about almost everything.