Ætherna

Bulletin Board

BookRetreats
Home >> News

News

Children’s Health Defense
Waking Times

It has been 13 years since the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) supplied fast-tracked approval for Merck’s Gardasil vaccine—promoted for the prevention of cervical cancer and other conditions attributed to four types of human papillomavirus (HPV). The agency initially licensed Gardasil solely for 9- to 26-year-old girls and women, but subsequent FDA decisions now enable Merck to market Gardasil’s successor—the nine-valent Gardasil 9 vaccine—to a much broader age range—9 to 45 years—and to both males and females.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

As a result of Gardasil’s expanding markets not just in the U.S. but internationally, the blockbuster HPV vaccine has become Merck’s third highest-grossing product, bringing in annual global revenues of about $2.3 billion. However, Gardasil’s safety record has been nothing short of disastrous. Children’s Health Defense and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. have just produced a video detailing the many problems with the development and safety of Gardasil. Please watch and share this video so that you and others may understand why Mr. Kennedy refers to Merck’s methodologies as “fraudulent flimflams.”

What follow are 25 key facts about Gardasil/Gardasil 9, including facts about the HPV vaccines’ clinical trials and adverse outcomes observed ever since Merck, public health officials and legislators aggressively foisted the vaccines on an unsuspecting public.

Inappropriate placebos and comparisons
  1. A placebo is supposed to be an inert substance that looks just like the drug being tested. But in the Gardasil clinical trials, Merck used a neurotoxic aluminum adjuvant called AAHS instead of using an inert saline placebo.
  2. Among girls and women who received the vaccine and among girls and women who received AAHS, an astonishing 2.3% in both groups experienced conditions indicative of “systemic autoimmune disorders,” many shortly after receiving Gardasil.
  3. Multiple scientific studies associate aluminum not just with autoimmune diseases but with autism, Alzheimer’s disease, dementia and Parkinson’s disease as well as behavioral abnormalities in animals.
  4. Merck lied to study participants, falsely saying that the clinical trials were not safety studies, that the vaccine had already been found to be safe and that the “placebo” was an inert saline solution. [Source: The HPV Vaccine on Trial  (photo evidence, pp. 6 and 12).]
  5. When Merck conducted clinical trials for its next HPV vaccine formulation, Gardasil 9, it used Gardasil as the “placebo” in the control groups, again relying on the lack of an inert placebo to mask safety signals.
  6. The 500 micrograms of aluminum adjuvant (AAHS) in Gardasil 9 are more than double the amount of aluminum in Gardasil; this raises the question of whether Gardasil 9’s heavy reliance on the Gardasil trials for comparison is justifiable.
  7. The World Health Organization states that using a vaccine (rather than an inert substance) as a placebo creates a “methodological disadvantage” and also notes that it may be “difficult or impossible” to assess vaccine safety properly without a true placebo.
Inappropriate inclusion and exclusion criteria
  1. In the only Gardasil trial in the target age group (11- and 12-year-old girls) with a control group design, fewer than 1200 children received the vaccine and fewer than 600 served as controls. This single trial involving fewer than 1800 children set the stage for the vaccine’s subsequent marketing to millions of healthy preteens all over the world.
  2. The Gardasil clinical trials had numerous exclusion criteria. Not allowed to participate in the trials were people with: severe allergies; prior abnormal Pap test results; over four lifetime sex partners; a history of immunological disorders and other chronic illnesses; reactions to vaccine ingredients, including aluminum, yeast, and benzonase; or a history of drug or alcohol abuse—yet Merck now recommends Gardasil for all of these groups.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Inadequate monitoring
  1. Some of the study participants—but not all—were given “report cards” to record short-term reactions such as redness and itching. The report cards monitored reactions for a mere 14 days, however, and Merck did not follow up with participants who experienced serious adverse events such as systemic autoimmune or menstrual problems.
  2. Injured participants complained that Merck rebuffed their attempts to report adverse side effects. In numerous instances, Merck maintained that these “weren’t related to the vaccine.”
  3. Half (49.6%) of the clinical trial subjects who received Gardasil reported serious medical conditions within seven months. To avoid classifying these injuries as adverse events, Merck dismissed them as “new medical conditions.”
Annual deaths from cervical cancer in the U.S. are 2.3/100,000. The death rate in the Gardasil clinical trials was 85/100,000—or 37 times that of cervical cancer. Cervical cancer risk-benefit ratio not worth it
  1. The median age of cervical cancer death is 58 years. Gardasil targets millions of healthy preadolescents and teens for whom the risk of dying from cervical cancer is practically zero. Interventions for healthy people must have a risk profile that is also practically zero.
  2. Annual deaths from cervical cancer in the U.S. are 2.3/100,000. The death rate in the Gardasil clinical trials was 85/100,000—or 37 times that of cervical cancer.
  3. With 76 million children vaccinated at an average cost of $420 for the three-shot Gardasil series, the cost of saving one American life from cervical cancer amounts to about $18.3 million dollars. By contrast, the value of a human life according to the Department of Health and Human Services’s (HHS’s) National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is $250,000—the maximum amount that the government program will award for a vaccine-related death.
  4. According to Gardasil’s package insert, women are 100 times more likely to suffer a severe event following vaccination with Gardasil than they are to get cervical cancer.
  5. The chances of getting an autoimmune disease from Gardasil, even if the vaccine works, are 1,000 times greater than the chances of being saved from a cervical cancer death.
  6. Women in Gardasil clinical trials with evidence of current HPV infection and previous exposure to HPV had a 44% increased risk of developing cervical lesions or cancer following vaccination.
  7. Women who get the Gardasil vaccine as preteens or teens are more likely to skip cervical cancer screening as adults, mistakenly assuming that HPV vaccination is a replacement for screening and that the vaccine will eliminate all risk.
Since Gardasil came on the U.S. market in 2006, people have reported over 450 deaths and over 61,000 serious medical conditions from HPV vaccines to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.

(function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:10162674340441958,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8962-3608"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.lockerdomecdn.com/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

Fertility effects
  1. Accumulating evidence points to Gardasil’s potentially severe adverse effects on fertility, including miscarriage and premature ovarian failure.
  2. Merck never tested the vaccine for fertility effects. However, Gardasil and Gardasil 9 clinical trials showed high spontaneous miscarriage rates of 25% and 27.4%, respectively—significantly higher than the background rates of approximately 10%-15% in this reproductive age group.
  3. Polysorbate 80 and sodium borate (Borax) are associated with infertility in animals. Both are Gardasil ingredients, and both were present in the one clinical trial protocol that professed to use a benign saline placebo.
Post-licensing
  1. In 2015, Denmark opened five new “HPV clinics” to treat children injured by Gardasil. Over 1300 cases flooded the clinics shortly after their opening.
  2. Since Gardasil came on the U.S. market in 2006, people have reported over 450 deaths and over 61,000 serious medical conditions from HPV vaccines to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).
  3. Merck lied to VAERS about the case of Christina Tarsell’s death, falsely claiming that her doctor blamed a virus instead of Gardasil. [Source: The HPV Vaccine on Trial  (p. 144).]
The vaccine that should never have been licensed

As suggested in the conclusion to the 2018 book The HPV Vaccine on Trial, the rollout of Gardasil in 125 countries worldwide has illustrated—in an all-too-real and shocking manner—the phenomenon that prompted Hans Christian Andersen to write “The Emperor’s New Clothes.” Around the world, over 100,000 Gardasil-related adverse events have now been reported to the FDA and WHO, and accounts continue to multiply of “scandal, lawsuits, severe injuries, and deaths.” For almost 200 years, Andersen’s story has taught readers about the need to speak the truth, pay attention to evidence and listen to children. The rosy narrative manufactured for the dangerous Gardasil vaccine must not be allowed to hold sway any longer. It is time, in the words of the HPV Vaccine on Trial authors, to proclaim—loudly—that “the Emperor has no clothes.”

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Like Waking Times on Facebook. Follow Waking Times on Twitter.

Nicholas West, Guest
Waking Times

“Comcast is already in talks with hospitals about taking on shared savings — if it can keep people from expensive emergency room visits.” — CNBC

It is becoming clearer each day that new technologies are further highlighting the great expanse between intention and application. As with all technologies of value, medicine has pitted the powerful desire of human liberation from suffering and the pursuit of a longer life up against the powerful desire to create centralized systems of management, both for profit and control.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

The fact is that Big Data and its attendant analytics is irresistible for central authorities. The ability to accurately predict macro trends, particularly in health, gains some level of public acceptance when married with arguments about the exorbitant price of healthcare. Put simply: people want to feel better, for cheaper, and might be more willing than normal to trade a bit of liberty in order to make this a reality.

In the medical field, this merger of Big Data and healthcare is known as Predictive Medicine, or more informally as “precision health.” It is a concept that is being heavily invested into by all major tech companies. However, we are beginning to see a move by tech companies not only to provide tools to the healthcare industry that might legitimately better serve patients at a lower cost, but some of them are working in tandem with insurance companies and the healthcare industry to form partnerships that are entering uncomfortably into the territory of behavior management and social engineering.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

There is no better example of this new approach than the new announcement by Comcast that it seeks to work with hospitals to profit-share any savings that Comcast can negotiate.

Comcast claims to have been working on a proprietary in-home medical tracking device that they feel can be used to monitor health and form a cost-saving relationship between patients and the medical system.

But, similar to the above-linked article about auto insurance, if the patient wants a cheaper rate, they might just have to agree to constant surveillance.

The device will monitor people’s basic health metrics using ambient sensors, with a focus on whether someone is making frequent trips to the bathroom or spending more time than usual in bed. Comcast is also building tools for detecting falls, which are common and potentially fatal for seniors, the people said.

[…]

Unlike most home speakers, the device won’t be positioned as a communications or assistant tool, and won’t be able to do things like search the web or turn lights on and off. But it will have a personality like Alexa and it will be able to make emergency phone calls in the case of a health event, the people said.

As CNBC goes on to note, this is part of the expanding trend of consumer smart devices that have spilled over from pure entertainment into healthcare.

The move would bring Comcast into competition with a number of technology companies, including Google, Amazon and Apple, which have also explored how to help older people “age in place,” or live independently for as long as possible. Google is looking at using its Nest and Google Home devices in senior living facilities, Apple added fall detection and heart health tracking to its smartwatch, and Amazon has been exploring opportunities in tech for the growing aging population for several years.

So far, one could choose to read only the upside to all of this, but it is the final paragraph which shows the murky waters we have entered, as it is unclear where private enterprise begins and government management ends.

My emphasis added:

In addition to developing new hardware, Comcast has been in talks with several large hospitals, including Rush in Chicago, said a person familiar with the conversation. The discussions with Comcast have centered around using the device to ensure that patients don’t end up back in the hospital after they’ve been discharged. Increasingly, hospitals are getting penalized by the federal government for failing to ensure that patients don’t end up right back in the emergency room, and are looking into tools to monitor patients remotely.

It is important to keep in mind that the above scenario is not only limited to physical ailments. There has been a concurrent trend to evaluate mental health in real-time and even to intervene if certain indicators trigger a call for action.

A  statement from Indiana University School of Medicine showed that they have identified blood biomarkers that can be used in conjunction with apps to predict a risk of suicide (and we have to presume other dangers to self and public), emphasis added:

“We believe that widespread adoption of risk prediction tests based on these findings during healthcare assessments will enable clinicians to intervene with lifestyle changes or treatments that can save lives,” said Alexander B. Niculescu III, M.D., Ph.D., professor of psychiatry and medical neuroscience at the IU School of Medicine and attending psychiatrist and research and development investigator at the Richard L. Roudebush Veterans Affairs Medical Center.

“We now have developed a better panel of biomarkers that are predictive across several psychiatric diagnoses. Combined with the apps, we have a broader spectrum predictor for suicidality,” Dr. Niculescu said. “In addition to reproducing and expanding our own previous work, we reproduce and expand other groups’ results in this burgeoning field.” (Source)

Facebook is reportedly getting in on A.I. mental health diagnosis as well by using pattern recognition to issue suicide alerts to local authorities.

The FDA approved a digital pill that uses sensors to relay collected information to doctors so they know if a patient is taking their medicine. Even the New York Times referred to this as, “Biomedical Big Brother.”

The “potential” for Big Brother entering the health field comes from Big Tech providing surveillance systems directly to government (and, incidentally, forms the basis for textbook fascism).

The government, in effect, has become one big insurance company. So where it appears that Comcast’s vision is in the spirit of competition to provide lower prices and reap rewards for doing so, it is the government that decides which company gains access, which patients are eligible, if certain patients must be eligible to receive tracking and intervention, as well as exactly how money is ultimately made and spent. That is not a free market.

According to the CNBC report, Comcast still hasn’t ironed out the final details for when their new technology will be released and exactly how their products and potential partnerships will be rolled out, but there certainly are plenty of questions that need to be asked while there is still time to get satisfactory answers.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

About the Author

Nicholas West writes for Activist Post. Support us at Patreon for as little as $1 per month. Follow us on MindsSteemitSoMeeBitChuteFacebook and Twitter. Ready for solutions? Subscribe to our premium newsletter Counter Markets.

Image credit: Pixabay

Like Waking Times on Facebook. Follow Waking Times on Twitter.

Jon Rappoport, Guest
Waking Times

Most of my readers now know that my blog has been taken down by WordPress for no stated reason.  We are working to restore the blog “by other means.” You’re reading this either because you’re already subscribed to my email list or someone forwarded this email to you. If you’re in the latter category, then the best way to get my daily articles is go to NoMoreFakeNews.com and sign up for the email list in the upper left corner.  You’ll get articles in your inbox.  Thank you for your support.

“Ah, yes.  Utopia.  You see perfection, i see mediocracy.  You see triumph, I see surface gloss and shiny objects and moths drawn to luminous signs and symbols.  You see order, I see walled-in compartments.  You see community, I see the abdication of the soul.” (From my Notes on Technocratic Utopia)

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

In early human societies, technology was primitive, and top-down control over the population was overt and menacing.

In modern times, technology develops apart from massive political power—or it seems to.

Large numbers of people who work with technology view it as a path to perfection of civilization.  Perfection equals order, organization, coordination, comfort, security, and so on.  Or as one technocrat put it to me, “Everyone and everything in its proper place.”

If you don’t examine what that means, if you just take it as a surface generalization, and if you dream technology can solve all problems, the future looks rosy.

You can even flesh out details of the future.  Buckminster Fuller did.  He proposed that technology had reached a point where every human on Earth could be guaranteed, from birth, at no charge, the essentials of life: food, clothing, shelter, education.

There are many versions of a technocratic utopia.  They all promise a collective triumph for the human species.

But is the fundamental premise true? Is modern technology developing apart from top-down control?  Unfortunately, the answer is no.  At the summit of the food chain, the people in charge see technology as a means of universal control.  They aren’t content to allow innovation with no firm hand on the reins of society.

Who will run the perfect society? The people who are building it. The technocrats, who see humans as pieces on a board; pieces that need to be positioned properly.

What quality will disappear if the technocrats have their way? FREEDOM.

A technocrat looks at humans and sees a mess made of millions of bad individual decisions; a massive and well-programmed computer can fix that, if the computer is made king. The computer can organize the whole of Earth. “You go here, you go there. You do this, you do that. You have this much energy you can use every month…”

If you ask a dumb and dumber liberal who will run the perfect world, he’ll say THE GOVERNMENT. If you ask a dumb and dumber conservative the same question, he’ll say GIANT CORPORATIONS AND BANKS.

The truth, of course, is GOVERNMENT AND GIANT CORPORATIONS, WORKING TOGETHER. How naïve does a person have to be to embrace, without worry, GIANT GOVERNMENT or GIANT CORPORATIONS?

Resistance to this future starts with understanding what INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM means.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Or else, at some point, you’ll get this: “Hi, I’m Jim. I’m with your electric company, your bank, your employer, your insurance carrier, your court, and your doctor. I just wanted to go over a few things with you prior to your annual interview. As you know, this year the energy allotment for each citizen is going to decline, so we want you to be prepared for that…”

Skip ahead in time and the annual check-up will include a DNA scan, to make sure your genetic profile fits your assigned status.

Too far-fetched? I can tell you this. Every year, the number of individuals who are ready to sacrifice their highest dreams and ambitions “for the sake of the community (the collective)” grows. The ideology of equality, twisted to turn into more control from the top, expands.

THE FREE AND INDEPENDENT INDIVIDUAL HAS NEVER BEEN MORE IMPORTANT.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

About the Author

Jon Rappoport is the author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALEDEXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29thDistrict of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Exit From The Matrixclick here.)

This article (Who is Going to Run a Perfect World?) was originally created and published by Jon Rappaport’s Blog and is re-posted here with permission.

Like Waking Times on FacebookFollow Waking Times on Twitter.

Julian Assange was hit with another 17 criminal charges under the espionage act today as a federal grand jury in Virginia returned a brand new indictment that adds 17 more charges to the original charge Assange was handed in March 2018. These are in connection with the alleged leaks publicly released in conspiracy with Chelsea Manning.

These new charges could land him in prison for the 170 years, all for doing what many are arguing are responsible and important acts of journalism. Need I remind that WikiLeaks has never had to make a retraction on their journalistic work.

The new charges against Assange include allegations that he published what John Demers, the head of the Justice Department’s National Security Division, describes a “narrow subset” of documents that identified the names of individuals who were working with the US government, including sources in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Of course, Assange’s arrest has been controversial since it happened. Garnering opinions from many directions including that he is a hero and that he is a villain that must be prosecuted for revealing government secrets. Demers responded to supporters of Assange who feel the WikiLeaks founder was being targeted for work as a journalist. Demers stated this information put the sources at risk, and that no “responsible” journalist would publish it.

“The department takes seriously the role of journalists in our democracy and we thank you for it. It has not and never has been the department’s policy to target them for reporting. But Julian Assange is no journalist,” John Demers

The US Department of Justice has just announced SEVENTEEN more charges against Julian Assange for publishing the most substantial piece of journalism in my lifetime.

— Cassandra Fairbanks (@CassandraRules) May 23, 2019

Assange is currently still serving a 50-week sentence in London after a judge found that he has violated his bail conditions.

This story is breaking and will be updated as we learn more.

In the meantime, for those still thinking ‘this is all part of the Q plan,’ check out a bit of a discussion on that below. I did a segment on The Collective Evolution Show on CETV. You can become a member of CETV and support Collective Evolution here.

Is this another story that will be heavily censored, and possibly even branded as fake news? It’s not unlikely, and it’s quite reminiscent of George Orwell’s 1984, a classic book depicting a populace ruled by a political regime that persecutes individualism and independent critical thinking as “thoughtcrimes” that must be enforced by the “thought police.” Today, the thought police are the global elite, who are using social media platforms like Facebook to censor information, no matter how well presented, sourced and truthful the information is. This is because information, in several different areas, is threatening multiple corporate, political and elitist interests.

So, who are these fact checkers? Well, NewsGuard is one of them, which is funded by Clinton donors as well as big pharma and the Council on Foreign Relations. These organizations are also heavily tied to mainstream media outlets like The New York Times. Mainstream media outlets are owned by a small group of powerful people. These groups also have very close ties to multiple corporations and intelligence agencies like the CIA. Although these days it doesn’t seem very hard to recognize this, mainstream media is still used to sway the minds of the masses on certain topics by ridiculing them and failing to address and counter the points made by others. The latest example of this is with regards to 5G.

The 5G wireless technology rollout has been happening for a long time. We’ve seen a lot of marketing and information detailing how this type of technology will make our lives better and speed up the process of anything wireless. President Donald Trump recently described the 5G rollout as a “race” that “America must win.” The Canadian Prime Minister has also been quite outspoken about 5G, but has completely ignored anything regarding the health consequences, like most politicians have done so far.

A recent article in The New York Times, a major mouthpiece for the establishment, is a fiction piece on the topic of 5G masquerading as news. The piece was written by William Broad titled“Your 5G Phone Won’t Hurt You But Russia Wants You To Think Otherwise.” The paper claims that the health risks associated with 5G technology are a crazy “conspiracy theory” without even acknowledging all of the concerns being brought up by hundreds of scientists and doctors, not to mention all the peer-reviewed research and the considerable number of papers that have been published on the subject over the years. If 5G technology is so safe, why don’t we simply put it through appropriate safety testing to ease everyone’s minds? The answer is simple: It’s an obvious threat to human health, and if the corporations who control this technology, which unfortunately seem to control our government health regulatory agencies, actually did put it through transparent safety testing, there is no way these technologies would be allowed to come out. It’s truly a crime against humanity.

Furthermore, it’s quite comical how the essay blames Russia. Too long has Russia been used as a tool to simply cast blame on, the latest example would be hacking the 2016 US presidential election. There was no evidence for that, and it seems to be a narrative that was made up out of thin air by the elite, using mainstream media as their tool.

“As a patriotic loyalist of Russo-paranoia, Broad has dreamed up a hallucination that Russia is preparing to outpace the US’s strategy to dominate the global “internet of everything” in the race to launch 5G technology globally. Aside from Broad’s otherwise corporate friendly stances supporting hydrofracking, genetically modified foods, and the myth that vaccines do not contribute to neurological disorders, he has produced some excellent work about Yoga culture and North Korea. Yet these are hardly topics that would enable a person to speak intelligently about electromagnetic frequency’s (EMFs) biomolecular effects on living organisms.”  – Richard Gate, Executive Producer of the Progressive Radio Network and a former Senior Research Analyst in the biotechnology and genomic industries, & Dr. Gary Null, the host of the nation’s longest running public radio program on alternative and nutritional health and a multi-award-winning documentary film director including Poverty Inc and Deadly Deception (source)

A Belgian government minister recently announced that Brussels is halting its 5G plans due to health concerns.

The statement was made by Céline Fremault, the Minister of the Government of the Brussels-Capital Region, responsible for Housing, Quality of Life, Environment and Energy. From an interview last Friday, with L’Echo:

“I cannot welcome such technology if the radiation standards, which must protect the citizen, are not respected, 5G or not. The people of Brussels are not guinea pigs whose health I can sell at a profit. We cannot leave anything to doubt.”

– Céline Fremault, Minister of the Government (Brussels-Captial Region)

There are more than 10,000 peer-reviewed studies that confirm 5G’s measurable adverse effects on human biology. Again, the Times completely ignored this and simply implied that these health concerns are a conspiracy theory. Meanwhile, as far back as 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)  classified EMFs as possibly carcinogenic to humans. This was based on research showing a direct correlation between glioma tumors — a malignant brain cancer — and wireless mobile phone use. The Agency falls under the umbrella of the WHO, a cesspool compromised of corporate conflicts of interests and biased influence. It’s important to mention that the former chair of the IARC group, Anders Ahlbom, who’s also the co-founder of Gunnar Ahlbom AB, a Belgian lobbying firm providing public relations services to the telecom industry, was responsible for evaluating the epidemiology and carcinogenicity of mobile phone radiation. The IARC is completely biased, yet it still admits that 5G is “possibly” carcinogenic, even though the science shows that it clearly is carcinogenic.

Between August 2016 and September 2018, over 400 new studies on electromagnetic radiation risks were compiled by public health professor Joel Moskowitz at the University of California at Berkeley. These studies cover earlier generation technologies, whereas 5G will be everywhere and far less safe. Compared to 4G technology, which is commonly used today, every 5G base station will contain hundreds of thousands of antennas, each aiming lasers like microwave beams to all devices. In an urban area, base stations could be installed as little as 100 meters (328 feet) apart.

Those studies show a myriad of risks, including damage to DNA, damage to sperm, neuropsychiatric damage, and much more. For example, a study titled “Microwave frequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs) produce widespread neuropsychiatric effects including depression” published in the Journal of Chemical Neuroanatomy outlines this quite clearly, and it’s only one of thousands of peer-reviewed studies raising multiple concerns in regards to this type of technology.

Dr. Martin L. Pall, PhD and Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry and Basic Medical Sciences at Washington State University, is another academic who has gathered a number of studies and compiled them together. Taken from his report titled “5G: Great risk for EU, U.S. and International Health! Compelling Evidence for Eight Distinct Types of Great Harm Caused by Electromagnetic Field(EMF) Exposures and the Mechanism that Causes Them,” he states that:

“Putting in tens of millions of 5G antennae without a single biological test of safety has got to be about the stupidest idea anyone has had in the history of the world.”

According to Dr. Marin Blank from Columbia University’s Department of Physiology and Cellular Biophysics,  with regards to wireless radiation in general:

“We have created something that is harming us, and it is getting out of control. Before Edison’s light bulb there was very little electromagnetic radiation in our environment. The levels today are very many times higher than natural background levels, and are growing rapidly because of all the new devices that emit this radiation. Putting it bluntly they are damaging the living cells in our bodies and killing many of us prematurely.”

If you want to dive deeper into the science of this stuff and see just how obvious it is, you can find a lot of research that’s been published over the years linked at the Environmental Health Trust. It’s a great resource.

Furthermore, we’ve covered this topic in depth, and you can read some of our other related articles if you’re interested. They’re listed below:

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau Completely Ignores Serious 5G Health Hazards

5G: “The Most Censored Story of 2018” – Journalist Masterfully Educates Houston City Council

Veteran MD Drops Bombshell At Michigan’s 5G Small Cell Tower Legislation Hearing

UN Staff Member & Whistleblower: “5G Is A Global Health Catastrophe”

Multiple Countries Ban Wifi & Cell Phones Around Schools, Young Children & Fetuses

Watch: Firefighters Report Neurological Damage After Cell Tower Installation Near Their Station

 The Takeaway

Do we really need to use these technologies? Why do politicians and mainstream media continue to talk about 5G without ever addressing the health concerns, and why do mainstream media outlets simply ridicule all of the health concerns that are being brought up by the public? What is going on here? Can mainstream media really convince people that 5G technology is completely safe, and that those who claim it’s not have no idea what they are talking about?

At the end of the day, all we can do is lower our exposure to EMF radiation. We can choose a faster wired connection. There are products available on the market, like paint for your home as well as clothing, that can block this radiation. Most importantly, you can utilize a healthy lifestyle as well as the mind-body connection to mitigate the effects. Awareness without fear/worry is our best tool, but at the end of the day we must continue to raise our voice in an age of massive censorship.

Stakeholders including clean energy and community groups are watching closely as ComEd begins the second phase of a microgrid pilot project in Chicago.
Stakeholders including clean energy and community groups are watching closely as ComEd begins the second phase of a microgrid pilot project in Chicago.

Matt Agorist, The Free Thought Project
Waking Times

Nearly seven years ago, Colorado citizens—tired of the war on drugs and wise to the near-limitless benefits of cannabis—made US history by voting to legalize recreational marijuana. Now, this state has once again placed themselves on the right side of history as they voted this month to decriminalize magic mushrooms. But this was just the beginning and their momentum is spreading—faster and stronger, toward decriminalizing all plant-based psychedelics.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Now, a major city in California is following suit, but not just with psilocybin—Oakland is calling for decriminalization of other psychedelics like mescaline cacti, ayahuasca and ibogaine.

To be clear, the recent measure does not mean that mushrooms are now legal in Denver, it simply means that cops can’t make it a priority to go after folks for them and it won’t land people in jail for possession. While legalization would be the perfect result, this is most certainly a step in the right direction and this step appears to be a giant leap now that California is doing the same.

As Forbes reports:

THE RESOLUTION, WHICH WOULD SEEK TO BAR POLICE AND OTHER CITY OFFICIALS FROM USING “ANY CITY FUNDS OR RESOURCES TO ASSIST IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF LAWS IMPOSING CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR THE USE AND POSSESSION” OF THE PLANT- AND FUNGI-BASED SUBSTANCES, HAS BEEN SCHEDULED FOR A HEARING BEFORE THE OAKLAND CITY COUNCIL’S PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE ON MAY 28.

IF APPROVED THERE, IT WOULD HEAD TO THE FULL COUNCIL FOR A FINAL VOTE.

Like the Denver resolution, the Oakland resolution would make possession of these psychedelics “amongst the lowest law enforcement priority” for the city under the measure, according to Forbes, which also specifies that the Council “wishes to declare its desire not to expend City resources in any investigation, detention, arrest, or prosecution arising out of alleged violations of state and federal law regarding the use of Entheogenic Plants.”

“We already have support from at least five members of the Council, but our goal is to get eight out of eight to show unanimous support, because this affects all communities in Oakland,” Carlos Plazola, an organizer with the group Decriminalize Nature, which worked to help draft the measure, said in an interview.

As TFTP has reported in the past, psilocybin-containing mushrooms are an enemy to the establishment who has every reason in the world to want to keep them as illegal as possible. The same goes for ayahuasca and other powerful mind-opening substances.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

The United States Supreme Court has unanimously ruled in favor of the legal religious use of ayahuasca by the União do Vegetal, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has affirmed the Santo Daime Church’s freedom to use Ayahuasca for religious purposes. However, ayahuasca’s principally active ingredient, DMT, remains a Schedule I controlled substance, carrying a steep prison sentence.

Many people have been forced to travel outside of the country to meet with Shamans in the Amazon who are skilled and knowledgeable about the substance.

One industry in particular, Big Pharma, stands to lose billions if measures like this one began to spread to other areas as mushrooms and other hallucinogens have been clinically tested to treat a wide range of problems, including depression.

One in ten men in the US currently takes an antidepressant while 16.5 percent of women use them as well. If people can treat their depression with something that you can grow in your own home or a plant medicine from a shaman verses taking pills with side effects like homicidal ideation, the pharmaceutical industry would lose big time.

Indeed, there are mounds of evidence and studies showing the positive benefits of magic mushrooms, ayahuasca, and ibogaine.

As TFTP reported last year, a study, published in the scientific journal Neuropharmacology, found that clinically depressed people had increased neural responses to fearful faces one day after a psilocybin-assisted therapy session, which positively predicted positive clinical outcomes.

“Psilocybin-assisted therapy might mitigate depression by increasing emotional connection,” neuroscientist and study author Leor Roseman, a Ph.D. student at Imperial College London, explained to PsyPost.

This is almost the exact opposite of how standard anti-depressants operate, as SSRI’s typically work by creating an “emotional blunting.”

“[T]his is unlike SSRI antidepressants which are criticized for creating in many people a general emotional blunting,” noted Roseman.

“I believe that psychedelics hold a potential to cure deep psychological wounds, and I believe that by investigating their neuropsychopharmacological mechanism, we can learn to understand this potential,” explained Roseman.

The government also stands to lose if more measures like this take hold in other cities too.

As TFTP previously reported, mushrooms and psychedelics used to be widely accepted as a treatment for many ailments until government moved in to stop the expansion of human consciousness.

As MAPS points out, although first-hand accounts indicate that ibogaine is unlikely to be popular as a recreational drug, ibogaine remains classified as a Schedule I drug in the United States (it is also scheduled in Belgium and Switzerland). Yet despite its classification as a drug with a “high potential for abuse” and “no currently accepted medical use,” people who struggle with substance abuse continue to seek out international clinics or underground providers to receive ibogaine treatment.

(function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:10162674340441958,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8962-3608"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.lockerdomecdn.com/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

In the 1940s, western medicine began realizing the potential for psychedelics to treat addiction and psychiatric disorders. Tens of thousands of people were treated effectively, and psychedelic drugs were on the fast track to becoming mainstream medicine. But the beast of oppression reared its ugly head.

In 1967 and 1970, the UK and US governments cast all psychedelic substances into the pit of prohibition. People were waking up to the fact that governments intended to keep the world in a state of war, and that governments were working to keep the populace sedated under a cloak of consumerism. The collective mind expansion of that era came to a screeching halt under the boot and truncheon.

As John Vibes pointed out last January, a study actually confirmed the fear of authoritarians and showed they have every reason to oppose legal mushrooms. According to the study from the Psychedelic Research Group at Imperial College London, published in the journal Psychopharmacologypsychedelic mushrooms tend to make people more resistant to authority. They also found the psychedelic experience induced by these mushrooms also cause people to be more connected with nature.

“Our findings tentatively raise the possibility that given in this way, psilocybin may produce sustained changes in outlook and political perspective, here in the direction of increased nature relatedness and decreased authoritarianism,” researchers Taylor Lyons and Robin L. Carhart-Harris write in the study.

Now, as people share information globally, instantaneously, on a scale unstoppable by the state, we are resuming the advancement of medical research on psychedelic substances. Scientists are challenging the irrational classification of psychedelics as “class A” (UK) or “schedule 1” (US) substances, characterized as having no medical use and high potential for addiction. And, the recent push in Colorado is evidence of this.

While the stigma associated with mushrooms and other psychedelics has been perpetuated by those who wish to keep them illegal—to keep society in a constant state of obedient mediocrity—in reality, they are extremely safe.

In fact, a major study last year declared magic mushrooms to be the safest recreational drug.

Of an astonishing 120,000 participants from 50 nations, researchers for the Global Drug Survey found the percentage of those seeking emergency treatment for ingesting psilocybin-containing hallucinogenic mushrooms to comprise just 0.2 percent per 10,000 individuals.

Rates of hospitalization for MDMA, alcohol, LSD, and cocaine were an astounding five times higher.

“Magic mushrooms are one of the safest drugs in the world,” Global Drug Survey founder and consultant addiction psychiatrist, Adam Winstock, told the Guardian, noting the biggest risk users face is misidentification — ingesting the wrong mushroom — not from the psychedelic fungus, itself.

After 40 years, it appears that another brick in the wall of prohibition is beginning to crumble in the face of science and logic. There may be hope for humanity after all.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

About the Author

Matt Agorist is an honorably discharged veteran of the USMC and former intelligence operator directly tasked by the NSA. This prior experience gives him unique insight into the world of government corruption and the American police state. Agorist has been an independent journalist for over a decade and has been featured on mainstream networks around the world. Agorist is also the Editor at Large at the Free Thought Project. Follow @MattAgorist on TwitterSteemit, and now on Minds.

**This article (As Denver Decriminalizes Mushrooms, Major City Moves to Decriminalize Ayahuasca, Ibogaine Too) was originally featured at The Free Thought Project and is re-posted here with permission.**

Like Waking Times on FacebookFollow Waking Times on Twitter.

It has been 13 years since the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) supplied fast-tracked approval for Merck’s Gardasil vaccine—promoted for the prevention of cervical cancer and other conditions attributed to four types of human papillomavirus (HPV). The agency initially licensed Gardasil solely for 9- to 26-year-old girls and women, but subsequent FDA decisions now enable Merck to market Gardasil’s successor—the nine-valent Gardasil 9 vaccine—to a much broader age range—9 to 45 years—and to both males and females.

As a result of Gardasil’s expanding markets not just in the U.S. but internationally, the blockbuster HPV vaccine has become Merck’s third highest-grossing product, bringing in annual global revenues of about $2.3 billion. However, Gardasil’s safety record has been nothing short of disastrous. Children’s Health Defense and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. have just produced a video detailing the many problems with the development and safety of Gardasil. Please watch and share this video so that you and others may understand why Mr. Kennedy refers to Merck’s methodologies as “fraudulent flimflams.”

What follow are 25 key facts about Gardasil/Gardasil 9, including facts about the HPV vaccines’ clinical trials and adverse outcomes observed ever since Merck, public health officials and legislators aggressively foisted the vaccines on an unsuspecting public.

Inappropriate placebos and comparisons
  1. A placebo is supposed to be an inert substance that looks just like the drug being tested. But in the Gardasil clinical trials, Merck used a neurotoxic aluminum adjuvant called AAHS instead of using an inert saline placebo.
  2. Among girls and women who received the vaccine and among girls and women who received AAHS, an astonishing 2.3% in both groups experienced conditions indicative of “systemic autoimmune disorders,” many shortly after receiving Gardasil.
  3. Multiple scientific studies associate aluminum not just with autoimmune diseases but with autism, Alzheimer’s disease, dementia and Parkinson’s disease as well as behavioral abnormalities in animals.
  4. Merck lied to study participants, falsely saying that the clinical trials were not safety studies, that the vaccine had already been found to be safe and that the “placebo” was an inert saline solution. [Source: The HPV Vaccine on Trial  (photo evidence, pp. 6 and 12).]
  5. When Merck conducted clinical trials for its next HPV vaccine formulation, Gardasil 9, it used Gardasil as the “placebo” in the control groups, again relying on the lack of an inert placebo to mask safety signals.
  6. The 500 micrograms of aluminum adjuvant (AAHS) in Gardasil 9 are more than double the amount of aluminum in Gardasil; this raises the question of whether Gardasil 9’s heavy reliance on the Gardasil trials for comparison is justifiable.
  7. The World Health Organization states that using a vaccine (rather than an inert substance) as a placebo creates a “methodological disadvantage” and also notes that it may be “difficult or impossible” to assess vaccine safety properly without a true placebo.
Inappropriate inclusion and exclusion criteria
  1. In the only Gardasil trial in the target age group (11- and 12-year-old girls) with a control group design, fewer than 1200 children received the vaccine and fewer than 600 served as controls. This single trial involving fewer than 1800 children set the stage for the vaccine’s subsequent marketing to millions of healthy preteens all over the world.
  2. The Gardasil clinical trials had numerous exclusion criteria. Not allowed to participate in the trials were people with: severe allergies; prior abnormal Pap test results; over four lifetime sex partners; a history of immunological disorders and other chronic illnesses; reactions to vaccine ingredients, including aluminum, yeast, and benzonase; or a history of drug or alcohol abuse—yet Merck now recommends Gardasil for all of these groups.
Inadequate monitoring
  1. Some of the study participants—but not all—were given “report cards” to record short-term reactions such as redness and itching. The report cards monitored reactions for a mere 14 days, however, and Merck did not follow up with participants who experienced serious adverse events such as systemic autoimmune or menstrual problems.
  2. Injured participants complained that Merck rebuffed their attempts to report adverse side effects. In numerous instances, Merck maintained that these “weren’t related to the vaccine.”
  3. Half (49.6%) of the clinical trial subjects who received Gardasil reported serious medical conditions within seven months. To avoid classifying these injuries as adverse events, Merck dismissed them as “new medical conditions.”
Annual deaths from cervical cancer in the U.S. are 2.3/100,000. The death rate in the Gardasil clinical trials was 85/100,000—or 37 times that of cervical cancer. Cervical cancer risk-benefit ratio not worth it
  1. The median age of cervical cancer death is 58 years. Gardasil targets millions of healthy preadolescents and teens for whom the risk of dying from cervical cancer is practically zero. Interventions for healthy people must have a risk profile that is also practically zero.
  2. Annual deaths from cervical cancer in the U.S. are 2.3/100,000. The death rate in the Gardasil clinical trials was 85/100,000—or 37 times that of cervical cancer.
  3. With 76 million children vaccinated at an average cost of $420 for the three-shot Gardasil series, the cost of saving one American life from cervical cancer amounts to about $18.3 million dollars. By contrast, the value of a human life according to the Department of Health and Human Services’s (HHS’s) National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is $250,000—the maximum amount that the government program will award for a vaccine-related death.
  4. According to Gardasil’s package insert, women are 100 times more likely to suffer a severe event following vaccination with Gardasil than they are to get cervical cancer.
  5. The chances of getting an autoimmune disease from Gardasil, even if the vaccine works, are 1,000 times greater than the chances of being saved from a cervical cancer death.
  6. Women in Gardasil clinical trials with evidence of current HPV infection and previous exposure to HPV had a 44% increased risk of developing cervical lesions or cancer following vaccination.
  7. Women who get the Gardasil vaccine as preteens or teens are more likely to skip cervical cancer screening as adults, mistakenly assuming that HPV vaccination is a replacement for screening and that the vaccine will eliminate all risk.
Since Gardasil came on the U.S. market in 2006, people have reported over 450 deaths and over 61,000 serious medical conditions from HPV vaccines to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. Fertility effects
  1. Accumulating evidence points to Gardasil’s potentially severe adverse effects on fertility, including miscarriage and premature ovarian failure.
  2. Merck never tested the vaccine for fertility effects. However, Gardasil and Gardasil 9 clinical trials showed high spontaneous miscarriage rates of 25% and 27.4%, respectively—significantly higher than the background rates of approximately 10%-15% in this reproductive age group.
  3. Polysorbate 80 and sodium borate (Borax) are associated with infertility in animals. Both are Gardasil ingredients, and both were present in the one clinical trial protocol that professed to use a benign saline placebo.
Post-licensing
  1. In 2015, Denmark opened five new “HPV clinics” to treat children injured by Gardasil. Over 1300 cases flooded the clinics shortly after their opening.
  2. Since Gardasil came on the U.S. market in 2006, people have reported over 450 deaths and over 61,000 serious medical conditions from HPV vaccines to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).
  3. Merck lied to VAERS about the case of Christina Tarsell’s death, falsely claiming that her doctor blamed a virus instead of Gardasil. [Source: The HPV Vaccine on Trial  (p. 144).]
The vaccine that should never have been licensed

As suggested in the conclusion to the 2018 book The HPV Vaccine on Trial, the rollout of Gardasil in 125 countries worldwide has illustrated—in an all-too-real and shocking manner—the phenomenon that prompted Hans Christian Andersen to write “The Emperor’s New Clothes.” Around the world, over 100,000 Gardasil-related adverse events have now been reported to the FDA and WHO, and accounts continue to multiply of “scandal, lawsuits, severe injuries, and deaths.” For almost 200 years, Andersen’s story has taught readers about the need to speak the truth, pay attention to evidence and listen to children. The rosy narrative manufactured for the dangerous Gardasil vaccine must not be allowed to hold sway any longer. It is time, in the words of the HPV Vaccine on Trial authors, to proclaim—loudly—that “the Emperor has no clothes.”

B.N. Frank, Guest
Waking Times 

News reports continue to remind us how cardiac issues are on the rise in children and adults.  Tens of millions of wireless utility “Smart” Meters have been installed in the U.S. and around the world.  Years ago, experts predicted that utility “Smart” Meters were a dumb idea.  People everywhere – including elected officials  (see 12, 3) – have been fighting to get them off their homes and out of their communities due to all the problems associated with them – including health issues.

Wireless utility “Smart” Meters emit RadioFrequency (RF) or wireless (microwave) radiationand Dirty Electricity.  This is also sometimes referred to as Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) and/or Electrosmog.  Research has proven that regardless of what you call it – exposure to any or all of this is biologically harmful. Some will handle exposure better than others.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Here are 2 videos showing what your utility “Smart” Meters may be doing to your heart:

(function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:10162674340441958,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8962-3608"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.lockerdomecdn.com/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

All utility “Smart” Meters cause problems. 

Court testimony from a California lawsuit revealed that PG&E utility “Smart” Meters can pulse up to 19o,000+ times a day.

In 2013, a Pennsylvania news team confirmed that PEPCO utility “Smart” Meters constantly emit radiation.

In 2013, Duke Energy blamed communication nodes from their AMI “Smart” Meters for causing touch lamps to malfunction and break.

Free online documentary, Take Back Your Power, covers ALL issues that have been associated with utility “Smart” Meters and “Smart Grids” (including higher bills, privacy violations, frequent replacement, fires and explosions, etc.).

Some utility companies offer opt-outs.  For those that don’t, customers may want to fight for them.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Like Waking Times on Facebook. Follow Waking Times on Twitter.
United Parcel Service Inc. has agreed to buy the equivalent of 170 million gallons of renewable natural gas from Clean Energy Fuels Corp. over the next seven years in what the company described as the biggest-ever deal involving the alternative fuel.
United Parcel Service Inc. has agreed to buy the equivalent of 170 million gallons of renewable natural gas from Clean Energy Fuels Corp. over the next seven years in what the company described as the biggest-ever deal involving the alternative fuel.
A new report produced by the International Energy Agency (IEA), the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), the United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD), the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO) and released this week says that despite significant progress in recent years, the world is falling short of meeting the global energy targets set in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) for 2030.
The United States in 2019 will become the world’s largest market for grid-connected battery energy storage, as solar-plus-storage and peaking capacity requirements drive increased procurement, according to IHS Markit.

It’s become quite clear over the years that we don’t really live in a democracy. The American government is ruled by a ‘higher power,’ and this is evident by the fact that corporations are really the ones who dictate government policies, which is why we constantly see a ‘revolving door’ of employees going to and from corporations and government agencies. For example, many former employees of the Food and Drug Administration are now employed by Monsanto (Bayer). There is a great infographic you can find here depicting some of this revolving door.

Tulsi Gabbard, who we will get to in a bit, also references this revolving door in a recent interview with Joe Rogan. 

This isn’t a secret anymore; in fact, politicians have been talking about it for decades, referring to a secret government that controls the presidency. A couple of months ago during a live interview, Putin said: “So, a person is elected, he comes with his ideas. Then people with briefcases come to visit him, well dressed, in dark suits, kind of like mine. Except instead of a red tie it’s black or navy. And then they explain what to do, and the whole rhetoric changes, you see? This happens from one administration to the next.”

This is why so many of the promises made during presidential campaigns end up flip-flopping. A great example of that is the wall issue–everything Donald Trump is saying about building a wall and having a system to keep illegal immigrants out and provide a process for others to come in legally has also been said by other candidates and presidents like Hillary Clinton, Bush, Obama and Bill Clinton. Sure, Donald Trump has presented his message very differently, but it’s now opposed by the Democrats simply for political purposes. You can read more about that here. Politics is about winning and controlling the minds of the masses, it’s clearly not about democracy.

Politicians and presidents in the United States have also been explaining this fact for decades. One of the best examples comes from president Theodore Roosevelt, who told the world that “Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to befoul the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day.” (source)

Here’s a great clip from Senator Daniel Inouye referencing the shadow government.

This is the ‘government’ that seems to control America, among several other allied countries. So why do we continue to play this game? Why are we made to believe that every four years our voting actually matters? Since I’ve been alive, every single president has been used as a puppet, and thus corruption runs rampant. Never have we seen complete and true transparency, and never have we seen a president or any political decisions that aren’t tied to some form of corruption and power.

We have to ask ourselves, is this system one big joke? Why do we continue to use it? Does it actually benefit humanity and the planet in any form? Why are we sitting on solutions to so many of our problems, yet they never see the light of day? What is going on here?

Will we ever see a president that’s not a puppet? Highly unlikely, but who knows? Donald Trump represents something very different than the previous political regimes, as  politician Newt Gingrich pointed out. He’s likely driving the global elite crazy, who clearly picked Hillary, a long time deep state puppet, to serve them. He stated that they’re upset “because he’s an outsider, he’s not them, he’s not part of the club, he’s uncontrollable… He hasn’t been through the initiation rites, he didn’t belong to the secret society.” – Newt Gingrich

This was clear, Trump was very outspoken about vaccines (which has since changed), 9/11, corporate control of the US government, the US government’s funding of and ties to terrorist organizations like ISIS and Al-Qaeda, foreign intervention, and other factors that the global elite were using. Trump represented change when he was first elected, but not so much anymore.

“For more than a year, we have been told that Trump is a racist, sexist, xenophobe, liar, cheat, and narcissist. The attack bears all the marks of a coordinated effort among the major news outlets: CNN, NYT, WaPo, HuffPo, USA Today, and the rest. It reminded me very much of the concerted media attack against Brazil’s Dilma Rousseff which culminated earlier in 2016 in her impeachment and removal from power. In the case of Rousseff, we see what has been alternately described as a soft coup or a Wall Street coup, rather along the lines of the “color revolutions” of a few years earlier (which are now largely understood as CIA-NGO orchestrated). In both cases, pretexts were created and hammered home by an insistent media that whipped up public opinion. In Brazil, it worked. It seemed like it would work in the U.S..

It is important to understand why Trump was demonized. To be sure, his character makes it easy. There is no shortage of narcissistic, sexist, or otherwise offensive statements in his repertoire from which to draw. But I have never and will never believe this is why he was demonized. Ultimately, Trump is a disruptor, and his disruption falls squarely against the two key pillars of the American ruling elite’s ideology: neoliberalism and neoconservatism.” – Richard Dolan (source

Sure, things have changed within the government since Trump’s presidential campaign, and although it appears he’s been compromised by the ‘Deep State’ and in many ways has become another puppet, perhaps not to the likes of Bush, Clinton and Obama. But again, he represents yet another president that’s not really fit to be called a ‘leader.’

Tulsi Gabbard On Assange & Snowden

Right now, it seems that presidential candidate and veteran Tulsi Gabbard is now the one speaking truth. If she’s elected, would her rhetoric change like all the others did? She has done many great things already. For example, when she was a Congresswoman, Gabbard introduced the Stop Arming Terrorists Act, the terms of which her website outlines succinctly: “The legislation would prohibit the U.S. government from using American taxpayer dollars to provide funding, weapons, training, and intelligence support to groups like the Levant Front, Fursan al Ha and other allies of Jabhat Fateh al-Sham, al-Qaeda and ISIS, or to countries who are providing direct or indirect support to those same groups.” (source)

She recently made an appearance on Joe Rogan‘s podcast. Rogan asked her about WikiLeaks founder Assange and NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, and she stated that they should not be persecuted for disclosing information.

We have got to address why [Snowden] did things the way that he did them. You hear the same thing from Chelsea Manning, how there is not an actual channel for whistleblowers like them to bring forward information that exposes egregious abuses of our constitutional rights and liberties, period. There was not a channel for that to happen in a real way, and that’s why they ended up taking the path that they did, and suffering the consequences.

What happened with his (Assange’s) arrest and all this stuff that just went down I think poses a great threat to our freedom of the press and to our freedom of speech. The fact that the Trump administration has chosen to ignore how important it is that we uphold our freedoms… and go after him, it has a very chilling effect on both journalists and publishers… and also on every one of us as Americans. It was a warning call… saying ‘look what happened to this guy.’ It could happen to you. It could happen to any one of us.

This is great to hear, as it’s quite clear that Assange, Snowden and others are threatened not because they put our ‘national security’ at risk, but simply because they threaten various corporate and political interests.

Tulsi is completely funded by the people as well, just like Trump was. She has no support from big corporations.

One of my favourite quotes from the show:

If I put my tinfoil hat on when I talk about these interventionist foreign policy wars and regime change wars, the tinfoil hat thinks military industrial complex. People being asked or forced into making decisions that benefit these giant corporations that make weapons and profit off of war. This is the worst case scenario in terms of conspiracy theories, the idea that someone wants war so they can make money, and they don’t care if people die, even needlessly. This is our number one conspiracy fear.

First of all, I don’t know how anyone who is well-versed on this subject could call this a conspiracy theory. It’s not just for money, these decisions are made to further their global domination agenda. That’s why William Binney, an NSA whistleblower like Edward Snowden, stated that surveillance is not for national security, it’s simply for “total population control.”  (source)

This is why it was great that Tulsi replied with the following:

Well, you can take your tinfoil hat off, because the military industrial complex is a real thing.

She then references the Eisenhower speech, when he warned us about the military industrial complex and how dangerous it is and the importance of guarding “against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for a disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist.”

This misplaced power is what currently rules America.

During her presidential campaign so far, Tulsi has been very outspoken about the corporate rule over America, speaking out against major pharmaceutical companies and corporations like Bayer/Monsanto and their products and ingredients including glyphosate. She’s called out American connections to terrorist organizations, and clearly opposes any type of war. She is also calling out the flip-flopping of Trump’s promises, such as his promise to get us out of “stupid” wars, but now how he’s become a puppet pushing war with Iran.

She recently stated on her Facebook: “Trump says he doesn’t want war with Iran, but that’s exactly what he wants, because that’s exactly what Saudi Arabia, Netanyahu, al-Qaeda, Bolton, Haley, and other NeoCons/NeoLibs want. That’s what he put first–not America.”

Again, as you can tell by the quote above by Dolan, Trump opposed these things during his campaign. But now, things seem to be much different as he continues the cycle in support of the “New World Order” agenda by creating a fake problem and then proposing the solution in order to achieve a desired outcome. In this case, it would be unnecessary military intervention in Iran, which is similar to what we saw with 9/11 and Iraq.

The Takeaway

Before Donald Trump, we hadn’t really seen any presidential candidate question the establishment and the corporate stranglehold that plagues the American government. I figured that after Trump did, we might see another political figure or two do the same thing. Although Gabbard is far less known and does not have connections to big money and power like Trump did, this can be seen as a good thing, and the fact that she is calling out her own government and its corrupt ways in a truthful manner is very encouraging.

It’s hard to see how she could be compromised or corrupted or become a puppet like many of those before her have.

The point is, America is ruled by a power that controls the government. Playing this game every four years is not really addressing the problem, and it’s questionable as to whether or not a fair voting process even exists in America given that the electoral college selects the president, regardless of the popular vote.

Positive change will not come as a result of the current president or politicians, it has to come from us and from supporting people like Gabbard who stay true to their words. Who knows, maybe she can threaten the power that holds control over the presidency and tackle the “Deep State” like we’ve never seen before.

At the end of the day, more and more people are waking up, and Gabbard seems to be one of these ‘woke’ individuals in many ways.

“The truth is, there is no Islamic army or terrorist group called Al-Qaeda, and any informed intelligence officer knows this. But, there is a propaganda campaign to make the public believe in the presence of an intensified entity representing the ‘devil’ only in order to drive TV watchers to accept a unified international leadership for a war against terrorism. The country behind this propaganda is the United States.” (source) – Robin Cook, Former British Foreign Secretary

In a world full of massive media censorship, something we at Collective Evolution have tried to combat with the creation of CETV, it’s great when celebrities use their voices to speak up about crimes against humanity, especially ones committed by their own governments. Obviously, these crimes go completely ignored by mainstream media because these outlets are controlled by the government, as exposed by multiple documents as well as multiple award winning mainstream media anchors and journalists.

Today, mainstream media is ridiculing certain topics that threaten their agendas, and this is in conjunction with elitist organizations labelling certain information as ‘fake news.’ Our voices and our right to freedom of speech are being threatened because of this censorship, which is more evident to those within the field of alternative media. Any type of information or evidence that threatens the narrative of certain geopolitical and corporate interests is being shut down. Media outlets are being demonetized, and mainstream media is refusing to cover certain topics and has even branded certain ideas as “conspiracy theories.”

This is why it’s great when celebrities, and people in general, use their voices to share information. It’s so important today to speak up, maybe even more so than ever before. Many people are afraid to speak up on ‘controversial’ topics out of fear that they’ll lose their jobs, or in some cases, out of fear for their lives given the fact that their voices can reach a large amount of people. Celebrities are usually used in this manner for marketing and advertising, given the fact that they have such large fan bases. That’s why when they do choose to ‘speak out,’ some people don’t like it.

The latest examples of celebrities brave enough to speak out are actress Susan Sarandon, celebrity Pamela Anderson, and music star Roger Waters.

All of them have been outspoken and asking questions about why the mainstream media (MSM) is ignoring a leaked Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) report, which contradicts the claim that Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad carried out a chemical weapons attack on his own people in Douma.

To recap, not long ago, the Working Group on Syria, Propaganda and Media (WGSPM)  published a document signed by a man named Ian Henderson, whose name is seen listed in expert leadership positions on OPCW documents from as far back as 1998 and as recently as 2018. It’s unknown who leaked the document and what other media organizations they may have tried to send it to, but with all of the lies that permeate through mainstream media organizations these days, it’s great to see documents like these being leaked. It’s something we need more of, and it’s not something easy to do. Julian Assange is a great example of the punishment and scrutiny you may face for simply leaking documents.

The report goes deep into the physics of the alleged gas attack and the narrative within the official OPCW analysis. It concluded that:

The dimensions, characteristics and appearance of the cylinders, and the surrounding scene of the incidents, were inconsistent with what would have been expected in the case of either cylinder being delivered from an aircraft.

The investigators stated that manual placement of the cylinders in the locations investigators found them in is “the only plausible explanation for observations at the scene.”

“To be clear, this means that according to the assessment signed by an OPCW-trained expert, the cylinders alleged to have dispensed poison gas which killed dozens of people in Douma did not arrive in the locations that they were alleged to have arrived at via aircraft dropped by the Syrian government, but via manual placement by people on the ground, where photographs were then taken and circulated around the world as evidence against the Syrian government which was used to justify air strikes by the US, UK and France. There were swift military consequences meted out on what appears now to be a lie. At the time, the people on the ground were the Al Qaeda-linked Jaysh Al-Islam, who had at that point nothing to lose and everything to gain by staging a false flag attack in a last-ditch attempt to get NATO powers to function as their air force, since they’d already effectively lost the battle against the Syrian government.” – Caitlin Johnstone (source)

After the document leaked, Susan Sarandon tweeted the following:

Hollywood star turned activist, Pamela Anderson, tweeted her (source!) support for “independent thinkers in Hollywood,” while Roger Waters, guitarist for Pink Floyd, called on The Guardian and journalist Jonathan Freedland to apologize for attacking him for accusing the White Helmets of concocting the chemical weapons attack. Not long ago, he stopped his concert in Barcelona to address the crowd about the propaganda being spread about what’s happening in Syria. He pointed out that the White Helmets are an organization that exists for the sole purpose of propaganda. Collective Evolution reported on the corrupt nature of the White Helmets in 2017 and we’re now seeing it here again. The White Helmets have been caught staging events to create propaganda for media. Not long ago, a UN panel discussing the criminal activities of the White Helmets relating to organ theft and false flag terrorism also went completely ignored by the mainstream media. You can read more about that and watch that panel here.

This Isn’t The Only Information Calling Into Question Facts About What Happened In Douma

As Mark Twain brilliantly emphasized:

“The statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception.”

This is what we’ve seen today–so called attacks that have, as the evidence points out, been staged by the ones who are and have been trying to justify an “intervention.” We’ve seen this with the “war on terror” and with terrorist groups in general. For example, organizations like ISIS have connections to the US government in several different ways. Take current presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard, a veteran who was quoted as saying that the “CIA has also been funneling weapons and money through Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar and others who provide direct and indirect support to groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda. This support has allowed al-Qaeda and their fellow terrorist organizations to establish strongholds throughout Syria, including in Aleppo.” Her statements align with a plethora of evidence–these aren’t just beliefs.

The idea that the US government and the western military alliance could be arming these terrorists and have their hands in staging “terrorist” attacks to justify an intervention and play the hero in the eyes of the masses is very disturbing. Their intentions are completely sinister.

The latest example I wrote about regarding the attacks in Douma was on Riam Dalati, a well-known BBC Syria producer who recently put out a tweet stating that the supposed gas attacks in Douma were “staged.”

How many whistleblowers, documentation and examples do we need in order to see the truth here? How many examples of mainstream media completely making up stories and aiding the global elite (their owners) will it take until we stop believing their narrative? Why do we continue to watch?

As his twitter states, he is also a close colleague of the well-known BBC Middle East Correspondent, Quentin Sommerville.

You can read more about that story here.

An interesting report by Robert Fisk (pictured above), a multi-award winning Middle East correspondent of The Independent who has risked his life to visit the Syria clinic at the centre of a global crisis, is also important to mention. Fisk joined The Independent in 1989 and has written bestselling books on the Middle East, including Pity the Nation and The Great War for Civilisation. Fisk gained his BA in English and Classics at Lancaster University and holds a PhD in politics from Trinity College, Dublin.

He met with Dr. Assim Rahaibani and shared his experience with the doctor:

“The 58-year old senior Syrian doctor then adds something profoundly uncomfortable: the patients, he says, were overcome not by gas but by oxygen starvation in the rubbish-filled tunnels and basements in which they lived, on a night of wind and heavy shelling that stirred up a dust storm.”

It’s important to get the real narrative of the people on the ground in Syria, but it’s also important to mention that he is sharing his experience not as an eye witness himself.

“He refers twice to the jihadi gunmen of Jaish el-Islam (the Army of Islam) in Douma as “terrorists” – the regime’s word for their enemies, and a term used by many people across Syria. Am I hearing this right? Which version of events are we to believe?”

He goes on to explain,

“Readers should be aware that this is not the only story in Douma. There are the many people I talked to amid the ruins of the town who said they had “never believed in” gas stories – which were usually put about, they claimed, by the armed Islamist groups. These particular jihadis survived under a blizzard of shellfire by living in other’s people’s homes and in vast, wide tunnels with underground roads carved through the living rock by prisoners with pick-axes on three levels beneath the town. I walked through three of them yesterday, vast corridors of living rock which still contained Russian – yes, Russian – rockets and burned-out cars.”

You can read more about that story here.

The list of examples goes on and on, and there are too many to mention within this article alone.

The Takeaway

How many examples are needed for us to see the truth? Why does mainstream media completely ignore this type of stuff? Why is it labelled as fake news? Are we really at the point where ‘fact checkers,’ who are funded by the global elite and major corporations, need to determine what is real and what’s not for us?

The world is more ‘awake’ than most of us think, regardless of the massive amount of censorship our world is experiencing. In a way, this censorship is making some claims more obvious.

The collective perception of our world is changing drastically, and that’s a good sign. It’s one important step towards positively changing our world.

Oregano Oil is one of the most widely used home remedies. Almost every crunchy individual with even the most basic understanding of herbal remedies will probably tell you it’s their go-to for...

[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]
This week the University of Nevada, Reno announced two discoveries in the Great Basin by the Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology using a previously untried method for finding unknown, hidden geothermal resources.

John Vibes, Truth Theory
Waking Times

The abortion debate is once again taking center stage in US politics, and the prospect of artificial wombs is slowly becoming a part of the conversation, as the technology is actually starting to become a reality. According to some experts in the field, we are just a decade away from this type of technology reaching the public.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Dr. Carlo Bulletti, associate professor at Yale University’s obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive science department, has predicted that a fully functioning artificial womb could be used in the medical field in the next ten years.

Scientists call this Ectogenesis, which is an artificial pregnancy outside of the body. Numerous experiments have tested this process with animals and have been slowly advancing the success rates of the procedure. In the most notable of these experiments, a premature lamb was kept alive for weeks in an artificial womb.

Study: Artificial womb technology and the frontiers of human reproduction: conceptual differences and potential implications

There are still concerns about how a pregnancy like this would impact the health and mental development of the baby, considering the importance of bonding, but many experts insist that artificial births are the future.

In a recent interview with Metro, Dr. Anna Smajdor, associate professor of practical philosophy at the University of Oslo, explained that bonding can happen mentally, but did not address whether or not this could cause developmental issues for the baby.

“Many arguments have been made about the necessity of gestation and childbirth for bonding. Although it may be true that the physical closeness between mother and baby facilitate bonding, it is certainly not true that it is necessary for bonding. If it were, fathers would have no claim to be bonded with their children. Not just this, but it is becoming increasingly clear that traumatic births actually impede maternal bonding, rather than the other way round,” Smajdor said.

“With developments in technology, increasingly, parents describe the moments of special bonding as being when they see the first scans. So this seems to imply that it is a visual connection that is regarded as being important rather than the physical one per se. Ectogenesis could actually facilitate this kind of visual bonding,” she added.

In an article for Wired, Tech writer Matt Chessen said that people in the future will find traditional pregnancy unappealing.

“Most future folk will find pregnancy – especially the delivery of an infant through a birth canal – messy and risky,’ technologist and author Matt Chessen wrote in Wired. ‘Creating a baby inside another human being is hazardous. The child’s health is dependent on the mother’s physical security as she navigates the world, and the fetus is susceptible to infections, poor nutrition, and other threats.” Chessen said.

Some researchers in the field have been even bolder than Bulletti with their predictions.

Last year, academic Elizabeth Chloe Romanis wrote in the BMJ’s Journal Of Medical Ethics that, “It seems probable that we are only several years away from testing on human subjects.”

Dr. Alan Flake, of the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, which carried out the most famous Ectogenesis experiment, believes that we could be just a year or two away from seeing this technology in FDA trials.

“We’re in the process of interacting with the [US Food And Drug Administration] FDA, so it’s not impossible that we could be doing a clinical trial one to two years from now,” Flake said.

This strange technology seems like something out of a dystopian film, but it could possibly provide a solution for women with health problems who still want to have children, and it could also make the abortion debate much more interesting in years to come. Although, even if there was an artificial way to continue a pregnancy outside of the body, this would not guarantee that there would be enough qualified parents to raise the children that resulted from all of these additional pregnancies.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

About the Author

John Vibes is an author and journalist who takes a special interest in the counter culture, and focuses solutions-oriented approaches to social problems. He is also a host of The Free Your Mind Conference and The Free Thought Project Podcast. Read More stories by John Vibes

**This article (Bayer’s Stock Has Lost 44% of Its Value Since They Bought Monsanto) was originally featured at TruthTheory and is posted here under creative commons.**

Like Waking Times on FacebookFollow Waking Times on Twitter.

Eoin Higgins, Common Dreams
Waking Times

A bill making its way through the Texas legislature would make protesting pipelines a third-degree felony, the same as attempted murder.

“It’s an anti-protest bill, favoring the fossil fuel industry, favoring corporations over people.” — Frankie Orona, executive director of the Society of Native Nations

H.B. 3557, which is under consideration in the state Senate after passing the state House earlier this month, ups penalties for interfering in energy infrastructure construction by making the protests a felony. Sentences would range from two to 10 years.

The legislation was authored by Republican state Rep. Chris Paddie. It passed the state House May 7 on a 99 to 45 vote, with two abstentions. The bill is being cosponsored in the state Senate by Republican state Sen. Pat Fallon.

In remarks on the state House floor during the bill’s passage, Paddie sought to assuage the fears of those who believe the legislation will target non-violent protest.

“This bill does not affect those who choose to peacefully protest for any reason,” said Paddie. “It attaches liability to those who potentially damage or destroy critical infrastructure facilities.”

But opponents of the measure don’t agree, pointing to the bill’s language.

“It’s an anti-protest bill, favoring the fossil fuel industry, favoring corporations over people,” Frankie Orona, executive director of the Society of Native Nations, told The Austin American-Statesman.

The legislation is “is criminalizing conscientious, caring people who are the canaries for their communities,” activist Lori Glover told The Texas Observer.

A hearing on the law in the state Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Economic Development on Wednesday drew opponents of the measure to speak outagainst the law, but it’s unclear if their testimony will make a difference.

The Texas bill is just the latest piece of legislation at the state level to target pipeline protests. In the wake of a spike in anti-pipeline actions over the past few years, Gristreported Tuesday, a number of states have come down on environmental activists.

The effort to punish pipeline protestors has spread across states with ample oil and gas reserves in the last two years and, in some cases, has garnered bipartisan support. Besides Louisiana, four other states — Oklahoma, North Dakota, South Dakota and Iowa — have enacted similar laws after protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline generated national attention and inspired a wave of civil disobedience.

The bill is drawing national attention as well.

“Texas aims to make pipeline protest a third-degree felony, same as attempted murder,” climate activist Bill McKibben tweeted on Friday.

In a tweet, the advocacy group Public Citizen described the legislation as “an oil and gas backed effort to squash environmental protest.”

“This needs to be a nation-wide story,” the group said.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

**This article (Texas Bill Would Make Protesting Pipelines a Felony on Par With Attempted Murder) was originally featured at Common Dreams and is re-posted here with permission.**

Like Waking Times on Facebook. Follow Waking Times on Twitter.

Pages

Connect with us

Subscribe to our rss and social networks accounts...

On the Subject of US

Ætherna Guild is a free will, clean energy & sustainable living community resource website. More

Navigation

Browse Ætherna's resourceful info!

Ætherna Guild



Energetic Balance Frequencies

Ætherna Guild's Mission

Awaken mankind's universal consciousness to find equitable solutions for a real, honest, best and prosperous Guild, based on unity and sharing, peace, respect and love, in harmony with nature and our environment to foster the achievement of collective goals leading to a higher intelligence and collective consciousness.

A Sovereign Space for One Hearth Guild ॐ

More