Slashdot Mirror

Frighteningly close to the truth. An example of Big Pharma and a corrupt lawmaker shows that the medical industry will try to regulate - charge for- anything that might work. For the sake of the children, of course.

What you claim Islam teaches and how a million Muslims live, every day, in the USofA ... well there seems to be a disconnect there.

No disconnect. They are already demanding Sharia law in the US. And people like you will evidently give it to them under the guise of political correctness. After all, you don't want to Offend a Muslim, or he might cut your head off or shoot you while you're in a meeting.

You can't tell me that shit isn't gonna happen, as it already happened, and will continue to happen. Because the fact remains, Western values are not valued by Muslims.

Here are some interesting articles, about Muslim sensibilities in the US.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/b...

http://www.newswithviews.com/W...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

http://pamelageller.com/catego...

Muslims are already being emboldened, and pressing for changes. Changes counter to the most liberal of sensitivities. However, it is blind political correctness that is allowing most liberals to cede their ideals in the name of tolerance. And heck, even newspapers are refusing to run the same cartoons that got twelve people killed, simply because they are scared of the results.

The fact is, our culture has been changed by radical Islam, because we no longer feel safe criticizing it. And there aren't enough "good" muslims protesting the supposedly "radical" few.

Charlotte Iserbyt was the former Senior Policy Advisor in the Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI), U.S. Department of Education during the Raegan years.

And she is a certifiable loon: http://www.newswithviews.com/i...

Charlotte Iserbyt is calling it a probable Soviet KGB conspiracy... which tends to damage her credibility. See http://www.newswithviews.com/i...

Despite this, she's still accurate when saying that the education system is in decay, as it shouldn't be that expensive to teach basic reading, writing and computation.

The article makes a lot of sense. Here is a twist on it. Iodine helps the body get rid of heavy metals. Overworked soils can become depleted of iodine. Maybe it happened to the Romans too? Although the USA stupidly made it worse starting in the 1960s by reducing the use of iodine in bread, which may have made the leaded gasoline issue worse:
http://www.newswithviews.com/Howenstine/james37.htm
"Forty years ago the food industry decided to remove iodine from baked goods and replace the iodine with bromine. Iodine and bromine appear similar to the thyroid gland and bromine easily binds to the thyroid gland's receptors for iodine. Bromine, however, is of no value to the thyroid gland unlike iodine and it inhibits the activity of iodine in the thyroid gland. Bromine also can cause impaired thinking and memory, drowsiness, dizziness and irritability. This substitution of bromine for iodine has resulted in nearly universal deficiency of iodine in the American populace. Iodine therapy helps the body eliminate fluoride, bromine, *lead*, cadmium, arsenic, aluminum and mercury. Could this substitution of bromine for iodine have been carried out to increase diseases and thus create more need for pharmaceutical drugs?" [My emphasis]

Seaweed can be a good source of iodine, BTW.

This is a relatively unbiased source

Everything you said about the DEA with respect to Primatene Mist is bullshit. Primatene Mist has epinephrine, not ephedrine. The DEA did seem to have a slanted view of Primatene tablets, but that seems to be in its favor rather than against.

The issues in Texas where they have put creationism in books, a fundamentally specific religious ideology towards christianity.

That's nothing compared to the indoctrinated ideology from the One World Communists that they have been pushing into the curriculum for the last 20 years.

http://www.newswithviews.com/Becraft/larry1.htm

Whether technically accurate or merely de facto, the US continues to prosecute people for "crimes" over which the federal government US has no jurisdiction outside treaty.

So while the naysayers may well have the letter of the law on their side, the FUDsters in this case have reality on theirs.

Show me a graph with the last 20 years. Or the last 50. Or the last 5. Quoting an unusual number like that is a tactic of political hacks known as "selecting data", and it's a fairly well-known slander.

IIRC, 2001 was the hottest year EVER. It was an outlier, a data point some ten to fifteen years ahead of us. It does not, by itself, disprove the the larger trend.

Actually, 1998 was the hottest year on record, 2001 lost it's place when it was discovered that there was an error in the way they averaged the temps in the US.

As for the graph, if you can find one that matches between different agencies. Anyways, we will simply go with this and this

I had not heard this before. Got a link?

Lol.. You haven't been paying attention then. That or you have only been listening to the quire and not the sermon. You can find this information on any temp map. Most of the glacier melting is caused by volcanic activity and sublimation. This was a point brought out by the misleading claims of Al Gore's reeducation movie where it incorrectly listed Mount Kilimanjaro as a global warming poster child. The glaciers in the antarctic where the temp averages 70 below use a combination of a process called super cooling and warning but through water and water vapor not anthropogenic green house gasses.

Only 700? Are any of them climatologists, with a proven record of predicting climate change on any level? Among this 700, is there a consensus borne about by study, or are they what politics would suggest they are -- shills paid for by those who profit from the status quo.

If you continuously discount someone or something because of where it came from, then you will continuously not know the entire truth. The so called concensus in the first place was only 300 scientists with not all of them meeting your criteria. Hell, most of them didn't even know they were participating until they were told what some of their work was being used for.

In fact, this entire consensus thing is a crock of shit to begin with, science doesn't take a popular vote to determine if something is valid or not. Science doesn't ignore the facts (observations) that screw the experiments up because they don't like the political associations or funding sources of the people bringing it forward. Think about where we would be if we did lock everything into one way because of a consensus. The world would probably still be flat, the sun would still orbit the earth, and Leaches would probably still be the best way to cure serious illnesses. Take your consensus and your criteria and apply it to days of future's past. You can easily see how silly it is.

There are over 6 billion people in the world. (I can provide a link for that if you doubt it.) Even if we assume that only one in a million is a publishing climatologist qualified to speak on the topic, that gives us a body of over 6,000. If the score is 5300 v 700, then the 88.3% have consensus.

Lol.. You making the mistake of assuming that everyone qualified is commenting on it. I can see how obvious but misleading mistakes like this surround you. Not all qualified scientists are commenting, the original consensus existed because a list of papers did not say man was not the cause of global warming. Now many of these papers were there before the concept of global warming existed and I say it's fraudulent to attempt to manipulate the data in that way, but hey, you accept it right? Sure you are, you are automatically assuming that every qualified scientist is working in that area and is commenting on anthropogenic global warming and that a list of 700 who don't agree with the current model or findings, many of which a

"It will soon be too late to ever be free again. It will not be possible for a liberty-minded people to set the building blocks for a redirected prosperous nation, under God, and united to stand against the real evil in the world. The very people we armed and organized into this "national police force" and relied on to protect us, have become the new enforcers for an international banking, business, and centrally controlled world. The UN just might allow us to live on a few feet granted by Agenda 21. These agents would be safe to force us into captivity because of world gun control. You see, gun control is people control. Just ask Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Sadaam, or the California Highway Patrol and the other "good guys" in New Orleans."

Our Land: Collateral For The National Debt
This isn't some scheme conjured up during the Bushes' and Clinton
administrations. The United Nations World Commission on Environment
and Development was created in 1982. The commission published the
"BRUNDTLAND REPORT" setting the stage for unlimited enactments to take
over ecology, and environmental and pollution laws throughout the
world. The report stated.......
http://www.newswithviews.com/brownfield/brownfield 59.htm
by Derry Brownfield
RR

I didn't read TFA, but NPR reported this a few weeks ago. According to the NPR report, they performed autopsies on the few bees that were found dead in the vicinity of the colony. Apparently, they suffered from odd cysts and internal lesions. One possibility that hasn't been discussed is that genetically modified crops might be part the equation. I know we all love CRM'd (Crop Rights Management??) crops, but it wouldn't be the first time that an ecosystem has been threatened by a combination of GMO crops and the over-application of herbicides.

I think, while in many cases I think technology is of a benefit to us, I also think that there are cases where it is harmful. We want to be selective about how we apply technology. For instance, there are drugs which have doubtless saved lives. With these drugs however, and with most technology, a person should be able to choose not to be exposed to them. No one tries for force a drug on a person, and a drug is usually used to treat a problem that exists, rather than given to everyone. Vaccines are provided to prevent diseases not currently present, however, even vaccines should be a matter of personal choice and no one should be forced to take them. The problem with GMOs is they are being forced on people who do not want them, and they are an artificial food which are being shown to have a good potential of being toxic. Furthermore, the issue of genetic pollution and the fact that crops tend to cross pollinate, endangers non-GMO fields where GMOs are not wanted, growing foods for people who do not want to eat GMOs. So the mere nature of GMO and its self replicating and transmissive quality makes it a danger to consumer freedom of choice to choose to not consume natural foods.

In regards to rat toxicity, As far as rats being intolerant of all potatoes, i am not sure about this. Rats being a scavenger species, might be equipped to handle, as such species often do, a large range of food items. I have been reading on the internet and I do see warnings to not give rats raw potatos, or green potatoes. Green potatoes are toxic to humans as well. Raw potatoes probably also would not be good for humans. Humans mainly eat cooked, ripe potatoes.

Problems have also been reported with corn and soy in rats.
http://uniorb.com/RCHECK/animalgm.htm

Also cows have been reported to die after eating GMO:
http://www.earthisland.org/project/newsPage2.cfm?n ewsID=576&pageID=177&subSiteID=44

Besides the potatos, we also have other reports of rats dying from eating GMO ingredients.
http://www.biotech-info.net/pusztai_article.html
http://www.soilassociation.org/web/sa/saweb.nsf/84 8d689047cb466780256a6b00298980/9f8d26bd0d23b83c802 5704600419579!OpenDocument
http://www.newswithviews.com/Smith/jeffrey8.htm

I do think that there is something odd going on here, and that the intolerance was likely not caused by a general intolerance to potatoes, but rather to the GMO ones. Studies which use a control group of a rats being fed non-GMO items can prove that.
I think when it comes to something like GMO, which is an artificial food, I would rather play it safe and go with the same foods humans have been eating for thousands of years, that is, non-GMO natural foods. For me, the risk in life and health is not worth it, to allow for agribusiness to make a little more profit. I do not like playing games with health and placing myself in unneeded danger, and especially with this technology, my gut instinct tells me the danger is significant and real.

I am one who would say we should not mess with the foods that we are eating, or at least, force them on people who dont want them. I am one who does support choice about what goes into our bodies, and the right of every person to refuse to put artificial substances into them if they refuse.

I do think, humans have evolved for thousands of years eating a certain range of foods and suite of nutritional components that comes from natural foods. The further we get away from the foods we have evolved to utilise and which our bodies are best equiped to handle, the less our bodi

http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd177.htm

The New Hampshire House voted overwhelmingly to reject the Transportation Committee's recommendation of ITL and in a subsequent motion to pass HB 1582, forbidding any state agency from participating in any national ID requirement.

I'm afraid I'll have to get my kid "enhanced" just so he can keep up in school.

Not to worry. With the way the powers that be seem to be bent on lowering school standards, you just might be called on to "de-enhance" your kid, instead.

And if they can't get to the humans directly with RFID, they'll get to 'em through the back way, by starting with all the domesticated animals (http://usda.gov/nais/). Either way, you will be numbered, you will be cataloged, you will be tracked, and you will show your papers. Ineffectiveness notwithstanding, and inevitable ID theft be damned, to say nothing of basic liberty. The Pentagon's been hacked, the VA's been hacked, the credit companies have been hacked, the CIA can't keep track of all their laptops, etc., "But this time, we'll get it right!"
Feh. You're welcome to your handbasket, if you like, but leave me out of it, thanks...

http://nonais.org/
http://libertyark.net/
http://newswithviews.com/Stuter/stuter91.htm

This has probably been posted already, but it's good...
http://news.com.com/Do+we+need+a+national+ID+card/ 2010-1029_3-6075218.html

Want more? Pay attention to Rep. Ron Paul...
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2006/tst052906.ht m

Why can't government just leave me alone? Damn the databases, bring on those FreeStaters. I just hope it's not too late...

It's only a matter of time before the crap hits the fan over sending work abroad, mainly because of the security risks. Outsourcing (and outsourcing customer info) to India has resulted in a lucrative trade in Identity Theft: http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd34.htm/
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/2/22 /170121.shtml

And if the area of support is unstable due to war, disease, unrest, etc., you can bet your bottom dollar that productivity is going to be disrupted:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/478455 4.stm

*And* how long is it going to be before governments start raising taxes to discourage this kind of backstabbing, and encourage patriotism, by employers (i.e. taxed to a level equivalent of paying local workforces at minimum wages anyway):
http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,3604,110440 3,00.html

So, my advice is not to worry to much about the cheaper dollar payrate, and just go for it, follow your dreams! It'll all come to a head sooner rather than later, you'll see!

http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/archive/index. php?t-31942.html

Theodore Roosevelt's ideas on Immigrants and being an American, and these words were said back in 1907.

"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't
an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag...We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

Theodore Roosevelt 1907

And
http://www.newswithviews.com/Bresnahan/david6.htm


Dear President Bush:

I'm about to plan a little trip with my family and extended family,
And I would like to ask you to assist me. I'm going to walk across
the border from the U.S. into Mexico, and I need to make a few
arrangements. I know you can help with this.

I plan to skip all the legal stuff like visas, passports,
immigration quotas and laws. I'm sure they handle those things the
same way you do here.

So, would you mind telling your buddy, President Vicente Fox, that
I'm on my way over? Please let him know that I will be expecting
the following:

1. Free medical care for my entire family.
2. English-speaking government bureaucrats for all services I might
need, whether I use them or not.
3. All government forms need to be printed in English.
4. I want my kids to be taught by English-speaking teachers.
5. Schools need to include classes on American culture and history.
6. I want my kids to see the American flag flying on the top of the
flag pole at their school with the Mexican flag flying lower down.
7. Please plan to feed my kids at school for both breakfast and
lunch.
8. I will need a local Mexican driver's license so I can get easy
access to government services.
9. I do not plan to have any car insurance, and I won't make any
effort to learn local traffic laws.
10. In case one of the Mexican police officers does not get the
memo from Pres. Fox to leave me alone, please be sure that all
police officers speak English.
11. I plan to fly the U.S . flag from my house top, put flag decals
on my car, and have a gigantic celebration on July 4th. I do not
want any complaints or negative comments from the locals.
12. I would also like to have a nice job without paying any taxes,
and don't enforce any labor laws or tax laws.
13. Please tell all the people in the country to be extremely nice
and never say a critical word about me, or about the strain I might
place on the economy.

I know this is an easy request because you already do all these
things for all the people who come to the U.S. from Mexico . I am
sure that Pres. Fox won't mind returning the favor if you ask him
nicely.

However, if he gives you any trouble, just invite him to go quail
hunting with your V.P.

Thank you so much for your kind help.

THE PEAK OIL MYTH By Dr. Stanley Monteith November 11, 2005 NewsWithViews.com The price of oil and natural gas was increasing before Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast, destroyed almost a fourth of our oil production, raised the price of gasoline to over $3.00 a gallon, and the price of oil to $70.00 a barrel. Will the rising cost of oil devastate our economy? The web site, hubbertpeak.com warns: "Oil will become more expensive and less available. This will be painful in the industrialized countries which have become totally dependent upon oil, and in the less developed countries where oil use is extremely sensitive to price escalation."[1] Dr. M. King Hubbert worked at the Shell Oil research laboratory in Houston, analyzed the oil reserves of the major oil companies, and issued a 1956 report that predicted U.S. oil production would peak between 1965 and 1970. Production peaked in 1971, and has declined since then.[2] U.S. natural gas production peaked the same year. How did Dr. Hubbert know what was going to happen? Was he clairvoyant? Was he lucky? Did he have access to "secret information"? Dr. Kenneth Deffeyes worked at the Shell Oil research laboratory in Houston, taught at the University of Minnesota and Oregon State University, joined the staff at Princeton in 1967, and worked there until he retired. Dr. Deffeyes' book, Beyond Oil: The View From Hubbert's Peak, he predicted world oil production will peak between 2004 and 2008. During a recent interview, Dr. Deffeyes predicted world production would peak in late 2005 or early 2006.[3] If Dr. Deffeyes is correct, what will happen to our economy? What will happen to the world economy? en.wikipedia.org states: "Oil depletion is the inescapable result of extracting and consuming oil faster than it can be replaced. Because the oil resource is not infinite, and its current replacement rate is quite slow relative to use, it will at some point be depleted."[4] Is oil a finite resource? Will oil production peak in late 2005 or 2006? Many geologists, media pundits, oil company executives, and the people they employ claim the world is running out of oil. Web site www.hubbertpeak.com states: "As humanity comes to terms with the inevitability of a world beyond oil, the remaining oil supply will be exploited in three ways: 1. To maintain the global economy; 2. To create a new solar economy which will not depend upon oil; 3. To fight over the oil that remains."[5] Most of the electricity that produces our products and heats our homes is generated by burning coal (which pollutes the environment) and natural gas, but Lee Raymond, CEO of Exxon Mobil, claims the U.S. is running out of natural gas. Reuters News Service reports: "After weak prices in the 1990s due to oversupply, natural gas production in North America will probably continue to decline unless there is another big discovery, Exxon Mobil Corp.'s chief executive said on Tuesday. 'Gas production has peaked in North America,' Chief Executive Lee Raymond told reporters at the Reuters Energy Summit. Asked whether production would continue to decline even if two huge arctic gas pipeline projects were built, Raymond said, 'I think that's a fair statement, unless there's some huge find that nobody has any idea where it would be.'"[6] healthandenergy.com confirms Mr. Raymond's statement: "Natural gas supply in North America is in decline, and no early simple solution is anticipated. These are the conclusions expressed in a study, 'North American Natural Gas: Data Show Supply Problems' just published in the journal Natural Resources Research. . . . Natural gas production in the United States peaked in 1971. Since then, Canada has increasing(ly) supplied the United States to 15 percent of its needs in 2002. However, in 2002, Canadian gas production declined. That trend continued in 2003. Currently 80% of all wells are drilled for gas, not oil, but in spite of this increased effort the production decli

That quote seems to come from an essay about school officials in Australia regulating lunchboxes...

there's no proof you actually _spoke_, but any jury in the world would convict you.

If you're American, you should be aware of certain Juror's rights that the court doesn't inform you about. Okay, this is a little off-topic but that line made me think of this article I read recently:

JURY RIGHTS! JURY NULLIFICATION

It kind of brings this into question, if this is such a possibility. http://www.newswithviews.com/public_comm/public_co mmentary7.htm

Unless we fight back against Big Media, we are going to lose, and lose hard, a lot of the things we have come to take for granted in the past 20 years of the Internet...

And as the saying goes, those who don't learn from history are condemmed to repeat it.

But does the section "and the Laws of the United States" mean that laws passed by Congress and signed into law can not be declared unconstitutional? Or is this speaking of something else? Is there a specific case you could point to showing that treaties trump, or are at least equivalent to, the Constitution?

All I can find regarding this is that treaties are on an equal footing with laws passed by Congress, and therefore may not contradict the Constitution. See this.

Repetitive behavior got you down?

I might be inclined to agree with you, if there was some hard evidence ADHD actually existed. The corelation between ADHA and IQ seems bogus. I know several people whom I would consider intelligent and whom are diagnosed ADHD. They exhibit absolutely no psychiatric abnormalities. Occasionally, in certain situations, they may get bored or restless, but so does everybody. As it is, it seems to just be a money making scheme by the pharalogical industry.