(NaturalNews) If vaccines play absolutely no role in the development of childhood autism, a claim made by many medical authorities today, then why are some of the most popular vaccines commonly administered to children demonstrably causing autism in animal primates? This is the question many people are now asking after a recent study conducted by scientists at theUniversity of Pittsburgh(UP) in Pennsylvania revealed that many of the infant monkeys given standard doses of childhood vaccines as part of the new research developed autism symptoms.

For their analysis, Laura Hewitson and her colleagues at UP conducted the type of proper safety research on typical childhood vaccination schedules that the U.S.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention(CDC) should have conducted — but never has — for such regimens. And what this brave team discovered was groundbreaking, as it completely deconstructs the mainstream myth that vaccines are safe and pose no risk of autism.

Learn more:http://www.naturalnews.com/035787_vaccines_autism_monkeys.html#ixzz1uHiFgPDL

Did Monsanto actually plant genetically modified alfalfa before it was deregulated by the USDA? There is some shocking evidence that, until recently, was withheld from the public showing that Monsanto’s genetically altered alfalfa may have been set free in 2003 — a full two years or more before it was deregulated in 2005. In a letter, obtained by NaturalSociety with permission to post for public viewing, it becomes clear that the USDA may have turned a blind eye to the entire situation, allowing widespread GMO contamination of GMO-free crops.

Amazingly, the letter actually proves that the USDA was fully aware of the situation. In order to fully understand the intricate details of this event, it is first important to understand a few key factors regarding alfalfa and its connection to the entire food supply.

Alfalfa is a perennial plant that grows for more than 2 years and may not need to be replanted each year like annuals.  Because it is a perennial plant, it is exceptionally vulnerable to contamination. Interestingly, the modified alfalfa — created by Monsanto in partner with a group known as Forage Genetics — was the first perennial plant to be deregulated for open planting by the USDA. But did Monsanto unleash the plant before this occurred?

read more at: http://www.blacklistednews.com

I sat down seven years ago this month with my son Adam and told him about the tragic death of a brave American woman named Rachel Corrie. As I informed him who she was, where and how she died, he stared at her two photographs in the paper and said, “Daddy, I will name my first daughter Rachel.” Adam was only nine years old, and I couldn’t have been more proud of him.

Rachel Corrie had a heart bigger than Texas. She paid the ultimate price fighting to uphold the international law that bans collective punishment.

Rachel was a 23 year-old Evergreen State College student from Olympia, WA. Rachel responded to the U.S. and Israeli rejection of a UN Resolution recommending an International Peace Keeping Force be sent into Palestine to serve as a human rights monitor there by enlisting in the International Solidarity Movement (ISM).

ISM is a group of international volunteers who partake in non-violent direct action resistance to the Israeli occupation. Members of the group live in Palestinian communities and experience first-hand the violence to which Palestinians are subjected every day by the Israeli military.

Rachel Corrie shared the Palestinian suffering and took some of the risks they are unfortunately forced to live with. Rachel dashed off to the Rafah refugee camp in the Gaza Strip. It was important for her to show that the world had not forgotten these people, and that individuals from all over the world are willing to interrupt their comfortable lives to come and risk themselves for the sake of the Palestinians and draw international attention to their plight.

In Rafah, Rachel acted as a human shield, escorting people to water wells and school children between their homes and schools in order to discourage Israeli soldiers from firing at them. Rachel also helped Palestinian children with their homework and with their English language. She was also setting up a sister-city relationship between her home town of Olympia and Rafah. Sadly, her dream vanished on March 16, 2003 when her life was cut short in a savage way.

According to 21 year-old eyewitness Joseph Smith, an ISM member from Missouri: “On that tragic day, Rachel stood in the pathway of an Israeli military bulldozer attempting to demolish the house of a Palestinian physician who was a friend of Rachel and her group, and in whose house Rachel and other activists often stayed.

Rachel was wearing a fluorescent-orange jacket with reflective stripping and armed with a megaphone. Rachel sat in the pathway of the bulldozer. She was 8-10 feet in front of the bulldozer and began waving. The bulldozer continued driving forward, headed straight for Rachel. When it was so closed that it was moving the earth beneath her, Rachel climbed onto the pile of rubble being pushed by the bulldozer. She got so high onto it that she was at an eye-level with the cab of the bulldozer. Her head and upper torso were above the bulldozer’s blade. The driver and co-operator could clearly see her. Rachel was crushed to death under the 10-ton U.S.-made machine.”

Israel claimed the driver didn’t see her. However, eyewitness accounts and Associated Press photos show Rachel standing in direct view of the bulldozer driver, dressed in a bright orange jacket and speaking into a megaphone. The driver would have to be blind and deaf not to notice that!

The next day, Palestinians in Rafah flew the U.S. flag for the first time during a memorial service held in honor of Rachel. Even that did not stop Israeli soldiers from raiding and disrupting the service.

Seven years later, Israel has failed to provide any proof that the Palestinian family, any of their children, Rachel and/or ISM has any link to terrorism. Nor there was a tunnel underneath the house to smuggle weapons. In fact, Israel demolished the house that Rachel tried to protect. And ISM is now nominated to receive the Nobel Peace Price with special recognition to Rachel Corrie. In her memories many streets in Palestine were named after her, so were new-born baby girls, and women’s empowerment centers. Documentaries about her life were made in every country, even Israel.

America acted cold-blooded in the death of Rachel Corrie, but screamed bloody murder regarding the kidnapping and death of Jewish-American reporter Daniel Pearl in 2002. I remember the outrage, public condemnations, and call for justice. Mr. Pearl was equally killed in a brutal way. The master mind of his murder is now in U.S. custody. In 1985, when a 69 year-old Jewish-American, Leon Klinghoffer was murdered aboard the hijacked Italian cruise ship Achille Lauro in the Mediterranean, U.S. fighter jets intercepted the Egyptian plane carrying his killer and forced it to land in Italy. His killers are now serving jail time. In 2003, US special forces in Iraq arrested the master-mind of the cruise ship hijacking. He died later of a heart attack in US custody.

Every red-blooded American should have been outraged by the death of Rachel Corrie. Her picture never made it to the front page, and even a Maryland College newspaper cartoonist depicted her as a stupid girl. The Wall Street Journal shamelessly accused her of being a terrorist sympathizer. The truth of the matter is, Rachel was a brilliant and brave American who stood for peace and justice. She had a rare courage and unflinching determination.

It is about time that our government stopped catering to Israel and its powerful lobby in the United States. It is a travesty of justice that an American citizen was killed in cold blood by Israel with no condemnation or investigation. Who will hold Israel responsible and call for a full and transparent investigation in the tragic death of Rachel Corrie? Justice delayed is justice denied!

As her former teacher said, “Rachel had a big heart that was hard to carry.” A heart that is bigger than Texas. Rachel Corrie deserves the Congressional Medal of Honor.

Source: RBN

Other stories at We Are Change Colorado Springs

To War, to War, America’s Going to War—with Iran

Adam “Pearlman” Gadahn lived with ADL board member Grandpa when he converted to Islam

U.S. Intelligence Found Iran Nuke Document Was Forged

Josh Gerstein over at Politico sent Threat Level his piece underscoring once again President Barack Obama is not the civil-liberties knight in shining armor many were expecting.

Gerstein posts a televised interview of Obama and John Walsh of America’s Most Wanted. The nation’s chief executive extols the virtues of mandatory DNA testing of Americans upon arrest, even absent charges or a conviction. Obama said, “It’s the right thing to do” to “tighten the grip around folks” who commit crime.

When it comes to civil liberties, the Obama administration has come under fire for often mirroring his predecessor’s practices surrounding state secrets, the Patriot Act and domestic spying. There’s also Gitmo, Jay Bybee and John Yoo.

Now there’s DNA sampling. Obama told Walsh he supported the federal government, as well as the 18 states that have varying laws requiring compulsory DNA sampling of individuals upon an arrest for crimes ranging from misdemeanors to felonies. The data is lodged in state and federal databases, and has fostered as many as 200 arrests nationwide, Walsh said.

The American Civil Liberties Union claims DNA sampling is different from mandatory, upon-arrest fingerprinting that has been standard practice in the United States for decades.

A fingerprint, the group says, reveals nothing more than a person’s identity. But much can be learned from a DNA sample, which codes a person’s family ties, some health risks, and, according to some, can predict a propensity for violence.

The ACLU is suing California to block its voter-approved measure requiring saliva sampling of people picked up on felony charges. Authorities in the Golden State are allowed to conduct so-called “familial searching” — when a genetic sample does not directly match another, authorities start investigating people with closely matched DNA in hopes of finding leads to the perpetrator.

Do you wonder whether DNA sampling is legal?

The courts have already upheld DNA sampling of convicted felons, based on the theory that the convicted have fewer privacy rights. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that when conducting intrusions of the body during an investigation, the police need so-called “exigent circumstances” or a warrant. That alcohol evaporates in the blood stream is the exigent circumstance to draw blood from a suspected drunk driver without a warrant.

Source: Wired

Other stories at We Are Change Colorado Springs

Suit possible over baby DNA sent to military lab for national database

The government has your baby’s DNA, and you don’t even know it

Tasing to get DNA?

Source: Youtube

Other stories at We Are Change Colorado Springs

THE LOVE POLICE

We Are Change Austin Street Action for the second amendment

We Are Change Boston Gives Fox News’s Carl Cameron WTC Nano Thermite Evidence News Tip

Aside from the most important environmental issues, population control has also been discussed at the Copenhagen climate summit. More and more governments are looking into a policy similar to that of China (a policy according to which a family is only allowed to have one child) as a possible solution to problems such as overpopulation.

The Supreme Court has just ruled that four Guantanamo prisoners cannot sue the government for torture. The Center for Constitutional Rights notes:

It is an awful day for the rule of law and common decency when the Supreme Court lets stand such an inhuman decision. The final word on whether these men had a right not to be tortured or a right to practice their religion free from abuse is that they did not. Future prospective torturers can now draw comfort from this decision. The lower court found that torture is all in a days’ work for the Secretary of Defense and senior generals. That violates the President’s stated policy, our treaty obligations and universal legal norms. Yet the Obama administration, in its rush to protect executive power, lost its moral compass and persuaded the Supreme Court to avoid a central moral challenge. Today our standing in the world has suffered a further great loss.

As Raw Story notes, this means that torture could return.

In fact, torture is a violation of both international and American law. Specifically, the Geneva Convention makes it illegal to inflict mental or physical torture or inhuman treatment.

Torture Is Still – In Fact – Illegal

As I pointed out in 2005:

The War Crimes Act of 1996, a federal statute set forth at 18 U.S.C. § 2441, makes it a federal crime for any U.S. national, whether military or civilian, to violate the Geneva Convention by engaging in murder, torture, or inhuman treatment.

The statute applies not only to those who carry out the acts, but also to those who ORDER IT, know about it, or fail to take steps to stop it. The statute applies to everyone, no matter how high and mighty.

***

Indeed, even the lawyers and other people who aided in the effort may be war criminals; see also this article , this one, and this press release.

The Military Commissions Act of 2006 limited the applicability of the War Crimes Act, but still made the following unlawful: torture, cruel or inhumane treatment, murder, mutilation or maiming, intentionally causing serious bodily harm, rape, sexual assault or abuse.

Is Torture a Necessary Evil?

Let’s not let a little bit of law get in the way. Many would say that torture is a necessary evil to defend our national security.

But as I have previously demonstrated:

• Torture doesn’t work in providing information which will keep us safe

• Torture actually reduces our national security

• Most of those tortured were innocent

• Torture has also been used throughout history as a form of intimidation, to terrorize people into obedience, not for gathering information

Moreover, the type of torture used by the U.S. in the last 10 years is of a special type. Senator Levin revealed that the U.S. used torture techniques aimed at extracting false confessions.

McClatchy fills in some of the details:

Former senior U.S. intelligence official familiar with the interrogation issue said that Cheney and former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld demanded that the interrogators find evidence of al Qaida-Iraq collaboration…

For most of 2002 and into 2003, Cheney and Rumsfeld, especially, were also demanding proof of the links between al Qaida and Iraq that (former Iraqi exile leader Ahmed) Chalabi and others had told them were there.”

It was during this period that CIA interrogators waterboarded two alleged top al Qaida detainees repeatedly — Abu Zubaydah at least 83 times in August 2002 and Khalid Sheik Muhammed 183 times in March 2003 — according to a newly released Justice Department document…

When people kept coming up empty, they were told by Cheney’s and Rumsfeld’s people to push harder,” he continued.”Cheney’s and Rumsfeld’s people were told repeatedly, by CIA . . . and by others, that there wasn’t any reliable intelligence that pointed to operational ties between bin Laden and Saddam . . .

A former U.S. Army psychiatrist, Maj. Charles Burney, told Army investigators in 2006 that interrogators at the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, detention facility were under “pressure” to produce evidence of ties between al Qaida and Iraq.

“While we were there a large part of the time we were focused on trying to establish a link between al Qaida and Iraq and we were not successful in establishing a link between al Qaida and Iraq,” Burney told staff of the Army Inspector General. “The more frustrated people got in not being able to establish that link . . . there was more and more pressure to resort to measures that might produce more immediate results.”

“I think it’s obvious that the administration was scrambling then to try to find a connection, a link (between al Qaida and Iraq),” [Senator] Levin said in a conference call with reporters. “They made out links where they didn’t exist.”

Levin recalled Cheney’s assertions that a senior Iraqi intelligence officer had met Mohammad Atta, the leader of the 9/11 hijackers, in the Czech Republic capital of Prague just months before the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

The FBI and CIA found that no such meeting occurred.

In other words, top Bush administration officials not only knowingly lied about a non-existent connection between Al Qaida and Iraq, but they pushed and insisted that interrogators use special torture methods aimed at extracting false confessions to attempt to create such a false linkage. See also this and this.

Paul Krugman summarized eloquently summarized the truth about the type of torture used:

Let’s say this slowly: the Bush administration wanted to use 9/11 as a pretext to invade Iraq, even though Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. So it tortured people to make them confess to the nonexistent link.

There’s a word for this: it’s evil.

Illegal … check. Unnecessary … check.

Why hasn’t America banned torture?

Source: Washington’s Blog

Other stories at We Are Change Colorado Springs

The Obama Justice Department’s Secret Blogging Team… Is it Illegal?

New unit to interrogate terror detainees

Alleged 9/11 mastermind: `I make up stories’

The “inconvenient truth” overhanging the UN’s Copenhagen conference is not that the climate is warming or cooling, but that humans are overpopulating the world.

A planetary law, such as China’s one-child policy, is the only way to reverse the disastrous global birthrate currently, which is one million births every four days.

The world’s other species, vegetation, resources, oceans, arable land, water supplies and atmosphere are being destroyed and pushed out of existence as a result of humanity’s soaring reproduction rate.

Ironically, China, despite its dirty coal plants, is the world’s leader in terms of fashioning policy to combat environmental degradation, thanks to its one-child-only edict.

The intelligence behind this is the following:

-If only one child per female was born as of now, the world’s population would drop from its current 6.5 billion to 5.5 billion by 2050, according to a study done for scientific academy Vienna Institute of Demography.

-By 2075, there would be 3.43 billion humans on the planet. This would have immediate positive effects on the world’s forests, other species, the oceans, atmospheric quality and living standards.

-Doing nothing, by contrast, will result in an unsustainable population of nine billion by 2050.

Humans are the only rational animals but have yet to prove it. Medical and other scientific advances have benefited by delivering lower infant mortality rates as well as longevity. Both are welcome, but humankind has not yet recalibrated its behavior to account for the fact that the world can only accommodate so many people, especially if billions get indoor plumbing and cars.

The fix is simple. It’s dramatic. And yet the world’s leaders don’t even have this on their agenda in Copenhagen. Instead there will be photo ops, posturing, optics, blah-blah-blah about climate science and climate fraud, announcements of giant wind farms, then cap-and-trade subsidies.

None will work unless a China one-child policy is imposed. Unfortunately, there are powerful opponents. Leaders of the world’s big fundamentalist religions preach in favor of procreation and fiercely oppose birth control. And most political leaders in emerging economies perpetuate a disastrous Catch-22: Many children (i. e. sons) stave off hardship in the absence of a social safety net or economic development, which, in turn, prevents protections or development.

China has proven that birth restriction is smart policy. Its middle class grows, all its citizens have housing, health care, education and food, and the one out of five human beings who live there are not overpopulating the planet.

For those who balk at the notion that governments should control family sizes, just wait until the growing human population turns twice as much pastureland into desert as is now the case, or when the Amazon is gone, the elephants disappear for good and wars erupt over water, scarce resources and spatial needs.

The point is that Copenhagen’s talking points are beside the point.

The only fix is if all countries drastically reduce their populations, clean up their messes and impose mandatory conservation measures.

Source:  Financial Post

Other stories at We Are Change Colorado Springs

UN Security Stops Journalist’s Questions About ClimateGate

Copenhagen: China Says Population Control Key To Global-Warming Deal

AL GORE CONFRONTED ON CLIMATEGATE IN CHICAGO

According to the free speech bastion “China Daily – China’s Global Newspaper” worldwide population control is the key to striking a deal on a global-warming treaty.

Ah…Copenhagen.  I’m sure the Danes are proud of their global-warming summit, but the rhetoric is getting pretty scary.

Zhao Baige is a member of the chinese delegation in Denmark, and she’s proud of her nation’s population control laws.  “Dealing with climate change is not simply an issue of CO2 emission reduction,” she says, “but a comprehensive challenge involving political, economic, social, cultural and ecological issues, and the population concern fits right into the picture.”

As I pointed out a couple days ago, every living human is a veritable CO2 factory.  Folks like China’s dictators, and Obama’s science advisor John Holdren, see that as a problem we can fix with forced sterilization, forced abortion, and governments who confiscate children.

The United Nations is in agreement.  According to a 2009 report from the UN Population Fund, “Calculations of the contribution of population growth to emissions growth globally produce a consistent finding that most of past population growth has been responsible for between 40 per cent and 60 percent of emissions growth.”  The report goes on to claim that if we could just halt population growth,  “it might result in 1 billion to 2 billion fewer tons of carbon emissions.”

For years, China has had stringent laws in place aimed at reducing the population growth by limiting the number or children a family can have, and aborting pregnancies that would result in the birth of more girls.

Zhao Baige defends her government’s practices.  “I’m not saying that what we have done is 100 percent right, but I’m sure we are going in the right direction,” she said, “now 1.3 billion people have benefited.”

Unfortunately, the “benefits” provided by the draconian measures seem to be minimal at best, since despite them, China is still the world’s number one polluter.

So, just to sum up, the world’s most polluting nation wants to limit the number of kidsyouhave, Obama’s science advisor has a plan to help with that, and if you want twins, you’d better hurry the hell up.  The world has no intention of indulging your selfish, planet-destroying,  multi-child wishes.

- Robert Laurie

More at China Daily, but remember, everything at the site vetted by the same government that brought you this lovely genocide.

Source: Robazution

Other stories at We Are Change Colorado Springs

Enviroment, Eugenics Quotes

PUSH FOR GLOBALISM CONTINUES

Climate: We Can ALL Agree On Two Things

Mandatory collection of newborn’s DNA?! I wonder what they’re doing with that DNA that they collect without any consent?
National DNA Database:
In 2006 and 2007, then, Senator Obama, filed legislation that would create a national DNA database. The same bill was filed by Sen. Patrick Kennedy in 2008 . The bills required parental consent, but all three died in the Senate. A new proposal will likely find its way back into the pipeline in the near future. We are now living in the Orwellian nightmare.

Source: Deadline Live

Other stories at We Are Change Colorado Springs

Libertarian Was Forced To Take A Thorazine Injection (Antipsychotic Drug) Because He tried To Inform People Of Their RIGHTS!

Your Credit Card Company Is Building A Psychological Profile Of You

DNA databases prelude to return of eugenics?