Your Life as an Atom - The Planetary Showdown Against Corporate Greed, Political Graft & Psychiatric Control by Steven Ferry

[Guest guest]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Your Life as an Atom

The Planetary Showdown Against

Corporate Greed,

Political Graft, &

Psychiatric Control

by Steven Ferry

 

 

If people let

government decide

what foods they eat and what medicines they

take,

their bodies will soon

be in as sorry a state

as are the souls of

those who live under tyranny.

Thomas Jefferson

 

 

Even if you're on the

right track,

you'll be run over if

you just sit there.

Will Rogers

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE OF

CONTENTS

Introduction...... 3

Taking Control of What May

Slide Down Your Throat 9

Organic Standards a Plastic

Orange Could Pass....... 12

Corporate Ownership of All

Seeds and Pigs......................... 15

Stink Bugs 1, Genetic

Engineers 0............ 17

Irradiation Solves Some

Nasty Problems.................... 19

Kloning Kloning Kloning

Kloning Kloning Kloning Kloning ......................... 21

Health Through Toxic

Chemicals................ 22

Vaccines are for the Birds.... 24

Because Everyone is Nuts

(Except Us)............. 28

The Destruction of Religion......................... 36

Chemicals on the Corporate

Farm....... 44

The Chemical Smorgasbord

Experiment.......... 49

Toxic Recipes......................... 52

Conclusion........ 54

Some of the Organizations

Doing Something............... 57

 

 

 

 

 

Introduction

 

Do you think of yourself as a bunch of atoms without purpose, values,

or aspirations? If so, then you will have no argument with the powerful

corporate and political forces shaping our society and your life. If you

believe otherwise, then you are in trouble and your life is in danger, for your

view is being overruled by people who have lost their spiritual and religious

dimension and consider themselves, and you, to be insignificant collections of

atoms in a universe ruled by unthinking force and what is left of their

spiritual dimension: deceit and destructive impulses.

 

When the mainstream media barrages us 24/7 with disastrous news

collected in real time from around the world, it has two effects: a) it numbs

our minds, reducing willingness to act, given the apparent magnitude and

pervasiveness of the problems; b) it focuses attention on those elements

reported on in the same way that a magician focuses attention on some banal

action while covertly continuing those actions that will bring about the real

effect desired on the audience. As a result of this media onslaught, a) it is

hard to derive a clear view of the forces that affects us personally and so

take action; b) a number of issues slip by stealth under our radar.

 

The overview that follows (it is not short, but it will open your eyes)

brings together some of the main pieces of a puzzle that when taken together,

create a very clear image on the radar. It is the intention of the author of

this booklet that the many smaller groups fighting these separate destructive

elements individually, recognize the big picture and join forces to fight each

other’s fight: for only then will they have the power and case to win over

legislators and the individuals that make up our society. Needed is an umbrella

organization that can give our legislators the numbers and rationale for

confronting the powerful interests that are setting our national and

international agenda and laws. As we are fighting the age-old battle of good

versus evil, maybe this organization can simply be called The Free World

Foundation. Whatever it’s name, without such a coordinating effort, the

majority who are good on earth will fall victim to the hidden and destructive

agendas of the minority who are evil.

 

This booklet is about a minority of our fellow citizens who are

covertly buying and confusing legislators and government bureaucrats into

changing the laws to increase profits through government-mandated monopoly.

What are these people bringing about as they seek more money and power? Simply

put, the requirement that all food be toxic, as sold through their companies;

the eradication of any health models not reliant on pharmaceutical drugs; the

legal right to drug the entire planetary populace with mind-altering drugs; and

ultimately, the eradication of religion and the spirit of man. These goals all

add up to improved market share, share prices and the bottom line—while you may

be more interested in preserving your health with the right to access genuinely

organic foods and effective nutritional supplements; as well as alternative

health models that focus on creating health, rather than deadening symptoms and

then cutting and burning out bits beyond repair; a relatively clean and safe

environment; and the right to pursue your own religious beliefs.

 

This article is not a corporate bash: Corporations are expected to look

after their bottom line, but not by engaging in programs and selling products

and services that harm their customers or reduce their quality of life. Nor is

this report a bash against traditional western medicine, which has its place,

to be sure. This report is about the actions of greedy individuals subverting

the fundamental government purpose of looking after the welfare of the citizens

that pay for and expect this public trust, and redirecting that government

through false information and kickbacks into forwarding a minority’s aims of

wealth and power by removing the right to choose from every citizen on planet

earth.

 

To be a bit more specific, pharmaceutical, chemical and food companies are

creating the legal framework that will force you to eat and drink toxins, and

when your body inevitably becomes ill as a result of the ingested toxins as

well as polluted environment, the only recourse you will have will be very

expensive medications, either psychiatric or medicinal, which will do little

but deaden symptoms and further weaken your immune system—a vicious circle

guaranteed to enrich drug companies all the way to your deathbed in a

materialistic world.

 

The alternative health and mental health fields, nutritional

supplements and organic foods, as well as the environment and religion, have

been under increasing attack for the last sixty years by companies and

organizations (actually cartels, meaning an alliance of businesses formed to control

production and prices, and limit competition). These cartels have a business

model and philosophy based on the use of chemicals to treat everything from

bugs to spiritual travails, which has resulted in a poisoning of the personal

and planetary environments. They follow a philosophy that regards you basically

as a collection of atoms to be cornered as a market for their products. The

gains made by these cartels over the last sixty years now mean that the end

game is beginning to play out.

 

Yet again, it is up to individuals like you and I to raise the alarm

without the assistance of the mainstream media, which is owned by a handful of

such large corporations focused on a bottom line that is determined by

corporate ad money, or lulled by cartel propaganda.[1]

It is up to you and I to bring together the silent and increasingly

drug-stupored and sick majority while there are still enough of us able to

think, and act for ourselves. We can and will roll back the short-sighted and

self-centered laws and advances made by these cartels, because there is one

thing the evil cannot survive, just like metaphorical vampires: the cold light

of day, or truth, exposing their activities.

 

In our favor, we have the majority of Americans who still hold a place

for religion and the spirit in their lives. We have sixty million Americans and

tens of millions in other countries who have woken up to the dangers of the

tens of thousands of chemicals being added to their food and water, PCPs

(personal care products), etc., not to mention their medications and

psychiatric drugs. The sixty million have moved to organic and natural

solutions, creating a multi-billion dollar “wellness culture” as

an alternative to industrial agriculture and the psychiatric/pharmaceutical

cartel and their “controlling sickness culture.” The organic food market alone

in the US has been increasing at 20% per annum for the last 15 years. These

sixty million people (one in four Americans), as well as their elected

representatives, are mostly still completely unaware of the fact that their

solutions will be outside the law and unavailable from January 2010 onwards.

That’s what happens when lobbyists are paid almost $800 million to change the

laws and the mainstream media are owned by or in bed with the cartels, or

merely eager for their ad dollars.[2]

 

What are you going to do when true health food stores close down

because their suppliers are out of business and the only food you can buy will

be in agribiz grocery stores or pseudo-health food stores owned by the same

cartels; when their produce will all be genetically modified and cloned,

stripped of its nutritional content, tainted with toxic fertilizers, pesticides

and herbicides, and irradiated with nuclear waste? Imagine all vitamin, mineral

and other supplements being made from synthetic substances, in minute doses

that have no efficacious value,[3]

and costing ten times as much as they do now. Imagine having no alternative

health practitioners, because their medicinal solutions are no longer being

manufactured. That’s the reality we may face in five years unless you educate

yourself and others, especially the legislature, on the threat to our health

freedoms, and unite with others to remove all legislation underwritten by, and

government agency bureaucrats in the pockets of, special interest groups.

 

Otherwise, by governmental decree, you will only be allowed to eat

toxic food. By governmental decree, you will have to take mind-bending and

numbing psychiatric drugs as the new religion in a society that considers religion

and the spirit unscientific superstition. By governmental decree, you will not

be allowed to take nutritional supplements with any nutrition in them. By

governmental decree, you will have to eat cancer-causing food and drink toxic

water. If you’ve read George Orwell’s book, 1984, you’ll recognize the plot: government

control overriding individual liberties for the benefit of the few. We are

finally reaching the nexus between a fictionalized prediction and its reality,

and it is your life we are discussing: Life as an insignificant atom, or

something more?

 

The intent here is not to sensationalize or alarm gratuitously,

but to depict the society we will be experiencing in a few years unless each

individual reading this takes the information to heart, passes on the

information widely, and supports those existing organizations who are fighting

back in the halls of power, over the Internet, and in their communities. But

for each of us to preserve the freedoms that brought us beyond slavery to

civilization, we will need to join forces and focus on our common goals, not

our differences. There will be plenty of time to fight amongst ourselves over

the fine print in the years ahead, but only if we join together now to fight

the actual enemy at the gates. If you and others do, then we will have a future

worth living, we will win, easily.

 

For this reason, I ask you to consider the information in this

overview and take action. The health of your body, your soul, and this planet does

depend upon it.

 

Taking Control of What May Slide Down Your Throat

 

You may not have heard of Codex Alimentarius, the international trade

regulation passed in Europe in early 2005 (by a committee comprised 90% of

chemical, pharmaceutical and biotechnology company

representatives) under the pretext of “standardizing the world’s food supply.”[4]

This is the centerpiece of the strategy to make you into a compliant consumer

by dictating exactly what food, drink and supplements can and cannot go down

your throat. Note that the organization dictating what we can eat is not a

health organization but a trade organization that has the power through World

Trade Organization sanctions to enforce its laws on all countries of the world.

 

In a nutshell, here is what Codex Alimentarius will mean to you when

it is implemented globally on December 31, 2009:

1. No supplement will be available for

preventive or therapeutic use.

2. Any potency higher than the Recommended

Daily Allowance (itself of minimal strength) will be considered a drug

requiring a prescription and must be produced by drug companies. Over 5,000

safe items now in health stores will be banned, putting nutritional

supplement manufacturers and health stores out of business and leaving

the pharmaceutical companies to supply (ineffective) “nutritional” supplements.

3. Natural health

professionals will not be able to treat with nutritional supplements and health

conscious people will be unable to choose natural health options for health

promotion and disease treatment.

4. New supplements will have to undergo very

expensive CODEX testing and approval. Common Law currently used in most of the

world permits things not specifically forbidden. The Napoleonic Code

upon which Codex is based, on the other hand, demands that anything not

explicitly permitted is forbidden, meaning all supplements would be banned by

default.

 

The irony or injustice of this set of proposals being, of course, that

of the 53 billion doses of amino acids, herbs,

vitamins and other nutritional supplements taken in the U.S. during 2003, four deaths

may have resulted. Pharmaceutical drugs, on the other hand, caused over 2,000

deaths in 2003 from over-the-counter medications—59 from aspirin, 147 from

Tylenol; and 200,000 from medications properly prescribed and taken in

hospitals. It sure looks like a black pot is calling a shiny kettle black. Or

the wolf is legally entitling itself to care for the welfare of the sheep.

 

While Codex Alimentarius sounds like a bunch of Latin (which it is, for

“The law concerning what is suitable for nourishing”) to most people who have

still not heard of it, a handful of individuals and organizations realized the

dangers it posed and did what they could to fight it against the odds.

 

Others listened to uninformed voices telling them that US laws would

protect them from Codex.[5]

They in turn were listening to disinformation and multi-billion dollar public

relations and marketing campaigns put out by supporters of Codex Alimentarius

(that nutrients need to be tested as unsafe, that the Codex is for consumer

protection, etc.).

 

Unfortunately, these hopeful people were whistling in the dark, for

Phase II of the Compliant Consumer strategy is now unfolding as US laws

standing in the way of Codex Alimentarius becoming the law of our land, are

repealed one-by-one over the next four years. The following legislative

activity has been (or is) being pushed through in the half year alone since

Codex became law:

 

1. HR 3156 Dietary

Supplement Access and Awareness Act, which permits the FDA to ban any nutrient

which has any degree of risk associated with it, even in the absence of any

proven harm from that substance.

 

2. SA 1379

attached to S 1042 creates an adverse event reporting requirement for

supplements while none exists for pharmaceuticals.

 

3. S 3 Protecting

America in the War on Terror Act of 2005 removes meaningful restitution for

persons harmed by vaccines while providing tax-payer-funded, corporate welfare

for vaccine and drug manufacturers.

 

4. HR 2485 DSHEA

(Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act) Full Implementation and Enforcement

Act of 2005 appropriates $175M over the next four years for the FDA to enforce

more-rigorous regulations on supplement manufacturers than those required of

pharmaceuticals.

 

5. HR 2510 Dietary

Supplement Regulatory Implementation Act of 2005 is similar to but worse than

HR 2485 above, providing for the adverse event reporting system for

supplements, but not drugs, and $10 million to educate physicians and consumers

about dietary supplements.

Organic Standards a Plastic Orange Could Pass

 

With pesticide, chemical and biotechnology companies representing 90%

of the two Codex Commissions related to nutrients, it is not surprising that

Codex also calls for the weakening of organic standards. This in effect was the

end run around the determined opposition by US consumers to USDA and its

corporate sponsors’ efforts to undermine the organic label, the most serious

threat of which occurred with the 1997 attempt at allowing toxic sludge,

genetically engineered organisms and irradiation onto organic farms. In 2004,

they tried unsuccessfully to permit previously banned pesticides,

hormones, tainted feeds, and animal drugs in organic food.

 

In keeping with the effort to remove US laws that prevented Codex

implementation, an “Organic Rider” was added to the 2006 Congressional

Agriculture Appropriations Bill. A handful of determined, small

organizations found out about the rider and alerted their memberships, who

inundated their

US Senators with 350,000 voices of protest about the rider, which would:

 

a. Give “organic”

farmers the right to use veterinary drugs and hormones and still sell their

meat and milk as “organic”;

 

b. Allow synthetic

pesticides on organic crops and farms and non-organic feed for animals;

 

c. Convert crops

and herds back and forth between organic and non-organic;

 

d. Permit

non-organic ingredients to be substituted for organic ingredients without

notification to consumers;

 

e. Require the

irradiation of all food;

 

f.

Reduce public input and the National Organic Standards

Board’s power, so that USDA bureaucrats and industry lobbyists, not consumers,

would control what can go into organic foods and products.

The senators listened to the public outcry at first, but the

powerful industrial lobby representing Kraft/Phillip Morris, Dean

Foods/Horizon Organic/ Whitewave, Dole, Smucker’s/Knudson's, General

Mills/Small Planet, Danone/ Stoneyfield, Aurora Organic, Whole Foods, Wild

Oats, and the Grocery Manufacturers of America (Wal-Mart and the supermarket

chains) prevailed, allowing hundreds of synthetic food additives and processing

aids to be used in organic foods without letting the consumer know, and young

dairy cows to continue to be treated with antibiotics and fed genetically

engineered feed prior to being converted to organic production.

 

Anyone familiar with organic foods will note that the giants have

infiltrated the organic market with labels such as Horizon, Whitewave, Small

Planet, Stoneyfield, Aurora organic and the two chains, Whole Foods and Wild

Oats. If they are happy with and promoting these lowered organic standards,

then one shops in their stores and buys their products at the risk that they

already contain unlabelled toxins, and will certainly in the near future.

 

Why does agribiz want to take over and dilute organic standards?

Simply, because they can sell their polluted and denatured produce to

unsuspecting consumers of organic produce at the significant mark-up possible

because of the higher prices real organic farmers need to charge in order to

turn a reasonable profit. They will no doubt sell below the full mark-up

initially to force real organic farmers out of business and so create a

monopoly of (fake) organic foods.

 

Meanwhile, things are not quit so cozy back on the Corporate Farm

in the rest of the world: In India, farmers from all over the country

met to create the “Organic Vision 2020,” a long-term strategy to shift the

nation’s 700 million farmers from pesticide-intensive, GE crops back to

ecological and traditional organic practices in order to resolve the degraded

soils, crop failures and crushing debt plaguing their nation’s output.

 

Then, the idea that food should have some nutritional content, the

opinions of Codex Alimentarius luminaries notwithstanding, has led the

British Prime Minister recently to respond to overwhelming public demand by announcing

the banning of junk foods from schools and the serving, instead, of organic

“made-from-scratch” meals. In the last three years, 45 states in the U.S. have

proposed 287 bills to eliminate junk food from their schools. The junk food

industry has lobbied hard and defeated over 85% of these bills. The citizens of

New Jersey and Maine won through, passing “junk food laws” that will remove

junk foods from pre-K-12 by the end of 2007.

 

Corporate Ownership of All Seeds and Pigs

 

Meanwhile, another arm of the corporate greed strategy as it

affects farming communities is the filing of patents to claim exclusive

ownership of every seed and pig on the planet. The Swiss biotech corporation

Syngenta is patenting the genetic material found in thousands of varieties of

rice, in effect claiming the work of breeders and farmers over millennia as the

company’s own invention.

 

Concerned that seed saving by farmers reduces their profits, seed and

biotech giants like Monsanto rammed though controversial “intellectual property

laws” in numerous countries that make traditional seed saving a crime. Last

year, Monsanto harassed and/or sued more than 500 U.S. farmers who had saved

their seeds, forcing them to pay the company over $15 million in fines and to

suffer up to 8-month prison sentences.

 

Not content with legal bullying, Monsanto and the biotech industry

tried legalizing Terminator Gene technology—seeds

genetically engineered to become sterile or commit suicide after one season,

thereby forcing the world’s 1.4 billion farmers to purchase patented seed

varieties from these corporations. With the spread of Terminator pollen and

seeds by the wind, insect pollinators, and commercial seed co-mingling and

transportation, a wide range of crops and plants would be killed, ultimately

making all farmers dependent upon Monsanto for their crops. The Terminator gene

was itself killed, instead, after a massive outcry in 1998, but Monsanto was

back in 2005 trying to overturn the United Nations’ global ban on Terminator

Gene technology.

 

As for pigs, Monsanto has filed patents in 160 nations for certain

types of breeding techniques that are already in common use by pig farmers

around the world—the idea being that Monsanto will own all pigs born of these

breeding techniques as well as their herds. Why? Well, pork sales in the U.S.

alone are $38 billion annually, and for those living high off the hog on George

Orwell’s Animal

Farm,

because some pigs are more equal than others.

 

Again, things are not quite working out as well as the criminals

would like, despite the World Trade Organization in March 2005 giving

corporations the right to “discover” seeds and genetic materials used by

indigenous peoples for centuries, and patent these materials, thereby obtaining

monopoly rights to its products and profits. The seeds of India’s Neem Tree

have been used as a fungicide for millennia. So Thermo Trilogy, an American

company, obtained a patent making it illegal for anyone else to use the seeds

for this purpose unless they first paid royalties to Thermo Trilogy. Chalk up

one for the good guys, however, because the patent was revoked by the European

Patent Office and will likely inspire the reassessment of dozens of other

similar patents.

 

Stink Bugs 1, Genetic Engineers 0

 

Let’s explore the world of genetic engineering further. While

self-destroying crops is an obvious self-destroying gambit for mankind, equally

so is the limiting of our food supply to a very few genetic varieties of

animal and plant species. Take the corn grown in the U.S. in the 1980s. Most

comprised just three varieties sharing the same vulnerability to pests and

viral and bacterial diseases. Most of the corn crop failed in that decade. Wide

gene and specie pools enable species to survive; yet modern agriculture has

reduced the number of grain species from thousands to less than a hundred. Genetically

Modified Organisms (GMOs) are the absolute in monocultures, being clones of a

single laboratory genome. Sixty million acres of crops in the U.S. are cloned

from a handful of plants.

 

Again, things are not going exactly according to plan on the GMO

Corporate farm. Tillamook, a nationwide distributor of cheese in the US,

has told its dairy farmers to stop injecting their cows with Bovine Growth

Hormone, a genetically engineered animal drug banned in Europe and most

industrialized countries. Monsanto, the producer of BGH, has threatened to sue.

 

Consumers and farmers in California and New England have passed local,

city, and county ordinances banning GE crops because non-GMO farmers have been

losing money every year as GMO pollen from neighboring fields contaminates

their crops. Monsanto led the counterattack, persuading 12 states to pass laws

denying cities and counties the right to ban GE crops. Californian legislators

listened to irate citizens and refused to bow to Monsanto’s pressure. In Europe,

3,500 cities and counties are now free of GMOs. Needless to say, the European

Commission is under pressure from the United States and the World Trade

Organization to keep European markets for GMOs despite 70% of Europeans not

wanting GMOs in their lands. According to a British government and biotech

industry study, growing GE crops contaminates land for over 15 years, prompting

the British to ban GE crops altogether.

 

While Monsanto (a familiar name by now) denies its genetically

engineered rootworm-resistant corn—which is being grown and consumed on a large

scale in the U.S.—can harm humans, internal company documents show serious

health damage to laboratory animals.

 

Naturally, the biotech industry does not want to tell consumers that

70% of their food is genetically engineered, even though 90% of Americans want

genetically engineered foods to be labeled as such. So they have fought any

effort to pass a law requiring GE content notification. There is currently a

way to tell, however: the PLU code for items grown with

 

Synthetic pesticides

and fertilizers consist of four numbers.

Organically grown

produce has a five-number PLU beginning with a “9”

GE produce also has a

five-digit PLU but beginning with an “8.”

 

 

Why would consumers want to know? Perhaps because when you combine the

genes of flounder (fish), ergot (fungus), petro-chemical fertilizers,

herbicides and synthetic hormones into wheat, one creates a Frankenfood that

neither nature nor one’s body recognizes. The body digests what it can, tries

to break down the rest with added sulphuric acid, and what it cannot break

down, is added to the toxic load, resulting in allergies, diseases, and

cancers.

 

Finally, Southern U.S. cotton farmers have an issue with Bt

cotton, genetically engineered to create its own pesticide to discourage

bollworms. The absence of bollworms is now attracting other pests, with stink

bugs causing three times as much damage as in conventional cotton fields.

 

Playing god, it seems, requires a few more talents than those possessed

by genetic engineers, and also a genuine concern for the welfare of others.

 

Irradiation Solves Some Nasty Problems

 

Which brings us to irradiation, the blasting of foods with

nuclear waste to give them a longer shelf life by killing anything living (good

or bad) in the food. The practice has been in use since 2000. Agribiz is

pushing irradiation as a solution to the bacteria and fungus problems that

arise when cattle are confined in overcrowded and fly-ridden feedlots and fed

everything from dead animals to sawdust, while being expected to drink water

contaminated with fecal matter.

 

Irradiation is mainly being pushed, however, by the Department

of Energy's Byproducts Utilization Program in an effort to reduce disposal

costs of spent military and civilian nuclear fuel by developing a commercial

market for nuclear waste.

 

As one might expect from the FDA, the watchdog for public health,

it supports the nuclear and agribiz position that nuking food is perfectly safe

for humans. How did the FDA arrive at such a conclusion? The usual way: by

ignoring any findings that did not match its intended spin. Specifically, they selected

five studies from over 400 carried out before 1980, even though its own expert

Irradiated Food Committee warned that these tests were grossly flawed. And as

one might expect from Congress, there was someone in the pockets of agribiz who

was happy to propose a law (in 2002, to circumvent the public distrust of the

FDA and the industry front groups claiming there is no danger in irradiated

foods) allowing irradiated foods to be labeled as “pasteurized.”

 

What is the truth about the effect of radiation on food and

humans? That the ionizing radiation produced by the shorter wavelengths of

gamma radiation used in food irradiation breaks up molecules, increases

levels of the carcinogenic chemical benzene while creating a whole new class of

potentially carcinogenic materials (radiolytic products), and creating genetic

damage in humans (through cyclobutanones, chemicals that cause chromosomal

damage in the intestinal cells of humans).

 

Our bodies have been exposed to a tremendous amount of nuclear

radiation still hanging in the atmosphere and in the environment from the last

six decades of nuclear testing. Radiation is cumulative in our systems and

causes cancer. There are solutions for radiation poisoning [a nutritional

supplement available for the last half century, as well as a detoxification

regimen developed a quarter century ago], so do not feel that the end of the

world is nigh; but having our radiation exposure increased by our food while

providing no nutrition is an extremely bad idea for anyone interested in

promoting life over death.

 

Kloning Kloning Kloning Kloning Kloning Kloning Kloning

 

As another extreme form of monoculture, cloning is an experiment

that, if it does go awry after becoming widespread, will have disastrous

consequences. Yet the FDA is expected to announce a policy late 2005 that will

legalize the sale of milk and beef from cloned cows. Whatever other ethical

considerations exist, nothing can justify reliance upon a world food supply

designed by man to solve one problem that will have some inherent weakness

overlooked by lab technicians. Again, diversity is the route to survival, not

monocultures, and nature has done a wonderful job of creating diversity over

time. While cloning no doubt has positive contributions to make to life, when

the motivation is money for a monopoly instead of delivering good-quality diversity,

shareholders and owners gain and mankind suffers.

 

Health Through Toxic Chemicals

 

The Pharmaceutical Research And Manufacturers of America represents

corporations “devoted to inventing medicines that allow patients to live

longer, healthier and more productive lives.” Sounds good, but how does it

square with the truth? Let’s look at one example: In August 2005, Merck

insisted to its 84 million past-and-present arthritis-suffering consumers that

there was nothing wrong with Vioxx; the FDA had said the drug was safe, after

all. A month later, Merck removed it from the market, admitting what it knew

back in 2001: Vioxx increased risk of strokes and heart attacks. 140,000 heart

attacks are now ascribed to Vioxx, with over 60,000 of these resulting in death.

For every death on 9/11, Vioxx alone killed twenty Americans.

How was Vioxx even

approved? Pharmaceuticals bought out the FDA during the 1990’s to reduce time

and requirements to approve and bring to market their latest drugs.

Pharmaceuticals then delivered biased research to obtain approvals and then

boosted sales with $3 billion in direct advertising to consumers (who then

demanded those brands from their doctor) and

the underwriting of continuing medical education. What has been the result of

this pursuit of profits over good medicine? In 1998, the British medical

journal 'Lancet' estimated 100,000 deaths in US hospitals from adverse drug

reactions. The Harvard Medical School reported in May 2002 that adverse drug

reactions “are believed to be a leading cause of death in the United States.”

Other estimates put the total number of deaths from harmful prescription drugs

(properly prescribed and taken) at 200,000 a year in the US alone. Airplanes

crashing into buildings and killing 3,000 Americans galvanized the world.

200,000 deaths each and every year, and all we see are wrists slapped and drugs

withdrawn to be replaced by more of the same.

Drugs

are chemicals, so the wider sphere of chemical poisoning of humans in the name

of commerce applies to companies beyond the pharmaceuticals. And once again,

individuals in the FDA prove equally amenable to kickbacks, as in the case of

Monsanto’s NutraSweet company that makes the phenylalanine in aspartame. The

problem with aspartame is that it breaks down into various toxins when exposed

to temperatures above 30ºC/86ºF. Which is interesting, given that the human

body’s temperature is 37ºC/98.6ºF.[6]

The fact that aspartame suppresses serotonin and antidepressants claim to

increase serotonin as the solution to depression is perhaps a coincidence, or

certainly a mixed message.

Unfortunately,

70% of U.S. adults and 40% of children are consuming drinks and foods

containing aspartame while the FDA finally admits to a long list of side

effects including brain tumors. A class action lawsuit has been filed in New

York and New Jersey against the makers for the harm they have caused. But how

come aspartame made it into our diets in the first place? Maybe one

should ask the FDA Commissioner and acting Commissioner or their six juniors

who went to work for Monsanto-owned NutraSweet, or the two federal attorneys

charged with prosecuting the company for submitting fraudulent tests to obtain

approval for its use in the food stream, who did the same. One other point

worth observing: aspartame is used in diet drinks and foods as a substitute for

sugar. Yet aspartame results in cravings for carbohydrates, not something

conducive to losing weight.

Vaccines are for the Birds

 

Finally, let’s review something that has been in the news recently:

fear mongering about dangerous new flu strains.

 

SARS and the H5N1 Asian Bird Flu[7]

are just more of the normal influenzas that come out of China every year, but

packaged into alarming new and terrible diseases courtesy of the media acting

on disinformation put out by the World Health Organization (WHO) and Centers

for Disease Control (CDC), ultimately at the instigation of pharmaceutical

companies. In case you did not know, the CDC is a government administrative

office in Atlanta, Georgia that coordinates and promotes the findings of the

Centers

for Disease Control around the country. These centers are mostly funded by

pharmaceuticals interested in creating markets for drugs. The media whipped the

peoples and governments of the world into a frenzy over SARS following grave

WHO and CDC pronouncements about its dangers. Yet at most, only a few thousand

were sickened by SARS and a few hundred died. Compared to the hundreds of

millions sickened by normal influenzas worldwide and about one million dying

(100,000 in the US) each year, one wonders why pharmaceuticals are spreading

alarm.

 

The pharmaceuticals wish to eliminate any liability for wrongful deaths

from vaccinations. The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program of 1986

protects companies from lawsuits not supported by scientific evidence. Yet

the pharmaceuticals would like total immunity. Why? Because the science behind

their vaccines is not as solid as a science should be; because the results

for those immunized are not as one would hope; and because their methods are

actually spreading viruses internally and externally.

 

As the following will show, we have nothing to fear except falling for

the fear others would have us believe, to extrapolate on FDR’s words. The Avian

Flu scare is just that: A manufactured crisis. Which is not to say that Avian

Flu is not a real influenza that can kill. But it can be combated effectively

and at almost no cost, so there is no need to buy into the fear mongering.

 

If you have bought into the vital need for influenza shots, then you

might like to know that immunization does not work, for the simple reason that

antiviral drugs are created using the prior year’s flu strains. They do not

work against this year’s flu strains because those strains have mutated.

 

Furthermore, looking at specific flu solutions: Tamiflu (a popular

antiviral drug) has been shown to produce drug-resistant viruses (which are far

more dangerous than a virus that has not learned how to evade a drug's effect)

in 18% of children treated.

And FluMist is a live virus vaccine based on the prior year’s virus

that introduces 10-100 million viral units into the nose. The recipient then

spreads these viral units for up to three weeks to everyone they come in

contact with, including the 60% of the population whose immune system is

weakened by chemical toxins in their bodies, in addition to at-risk groups such

as nursing babies, people with eczema, HIV, taking steroids, or receiving

chemotherapy or radiation treatment. In effect, FluMist adds another virus to the

current year’s virus, which in turn can feed off it to create further mutations

and thus a pandemic.

 

The fact is that the pharmaceutical industry has been working for the

last century to replace un-patentable and cheap natural remedies with expensive

and patentable synthetic remedies. Their efforts bore fruit after the Second

World War when the officially sanctioned way to combat viruses became

immunization, and the reduction of the influenza fever and its resulting

discomfort by taking synthetic over-the-counter cold and flu medications such

as Advil and Tylenol. These drop one’s temperature so one feels well enough to

walk around, spreading the virus to others for about a week while the virus

proliferates in one’s own body. Finally, one’s immune system is overwhelmed and

if one contracts viral pneumonia, one’s chances of survival are about 50%.

 

In effect, the current officially sanctioned way to deal with viruses

is: a) spreading the old virus in vaccines and so making the new virus more

potent, b) using vaccines based on old strains that cannot be effective against

the current virus, c) further compromising the immune system and d)

guaranteeing the proliferation of the virus internally and to others in the

environment, thus creating that which is feared: an epidemic and even a

pandemic.

 

So if the current policies are not effective, what can one do? Perhaps,

looking at the big picture, the most obvious course of action is for the world

community to object strenuously to the Chinese government concerning its

inaction over the last quarter century since it has been recognized that

raising pigs and geese in close proximity has been the source of worldwide flu

outbreaks for centuries. While the loss of millions of lives may not mean much

to a government that has billions of citizens, 100,000 US deaths a year and a

million worldwide for thousands of years (adjusted in ratio to the planetary

populace) have some significance to the rest of the planet’s inhabitants and

governments.

 

To find out what does handle influenza effectively and at

almost no cost to you, see footnote 8[8].

Because Everyone is Nuts (Except Us)

To

understand how the pharmaceuticals moved beyond the relatively small markets of

insane asylum patients and Hollywood celebrities (whom they chemically

lobotomizing with Thorazine during the 1950s) to every citizen of the world as

a customer for its drugs from 1960 onwards, one has to look at those who

administered the drugs.

Psychiatrists realized in the 1960s that they could create a vast market

and achieve their goals of social control by redefining behavioral problems as

physical illnesses resulting from chemical imbalances in the brain (the

problem) and then offering drugs to bring about balance (the solution). By

redefining more and more human behavior as diseases, it would be possible to

have the entire population of the world on these drugs—even those who had

nothing wrong with them other than a disagreement with this strategy, because

they could be labeled as being in denial and therefore chemically imbalanced.

The pharmaceutical industry was quick to support this theory even

though legitimate medicine requires the identification of physical symptoms to

diagnose a disease. Almost half a century later and psychiatrists have now (as

of 1994) listed 374 such diseases, not one of which has clinically testable

physical symptoms. Citizens are diagnosed by subjective opinion about their

behavior. Meanwhile, in an effort to sound scientific, psychiatrists and

pharmaceutical companies claim that these diseases are based on chemical

imbalances in the brain. However, no tests exist to determine the chemical

status of a person’s brain while he is living, and no standards exist as

established by scientific research, which could be regarded as a model of a brain

in balance.

 

Pharmaceuticals go on to claim that a particular neurotransmitter

causes a specific reaction and is localized to one part of the brain. This then

justifies the industry use of drugs—which they claim to have fine-tuned to a

specific location of the brain in order to inhibit a specific function of that

brain (let’s just assume that a particular area of the brain determines thought

and function, even though it has not been proven).

 

What’s the truth? Brain cells form molecules by combining whatever

atoms and smaller molecules they can, and spitting them across the cleft

between cells, to stimulate the next cell. In effect, there are thousands of

different types of molecules in use, not a handful as psychiatrists claim.

 

An analogy would be psychiatrists claiming they had discovered man’s

natural diet to be chocolate, and insisting that chocolate provides all the

nutrients one needs, then insisting that everybody eat only chocolate and, for

good measure, teaming up with the makers of chocolates to produce pricey

chocolate in a pill. Or as one student of psychiatry (who abandoned the

profession during his grad school training) said more succinctly, it is “like

trying to perform delicate microsurgery on a field mouse by flying overhead in

a helicopter and dropping machetes under conditions of heavy wind.”

 

This junk science doesn’t discourage psychs from fraudulently

misdiagnosing tens of millions of people as suffering from these diseases

(which, by the way, result from ideas psychiatrists have and vote on at their

meetings—really!). Nor does it stop pharmaceutical companies from making

psychiatric drugs to treat these made-up diseases and then spending billions to

persuade the medical profession and, through direct advertising, citizens of

the need to take these mind-altering drugs.

For anyone who imagines psychiatric drugs actually do any good,

consider the 2002 study by psychologists Irving Kirsch and Thomas Moore

published in the e-journal of the American Psychological Association. They

reviewed 47 research test-studies submitted to the FDA for approval of

antidepressants including Prozac, Paxil, and Zoloft. Their study showed that

sugar pills produced better results than these drugs. The manufacturers make

over $6 billion a year from the American public for these particular sugar

pills—which unlike real sugar pills, also create violent behavior, and real

psychosis upon withdrawal. Furthermore, the only government body demanding that

psychs provide feedback on actual results (King County in Washington, which

includes Seattle) found in 2002 that psychiatric drugs result in improvements

in 1 in 2,000 people. Who would take their car to a mechanic who fixed one in

every 2,000 vehicles? Yet politicians are being bought and persuaded to lend

the power of the government to forcing every single one of us onto these drugs,

and all this even though top psychiatrists admit they do not know what they are

doing:

 

“The time when psychiatrists considered that

they could cure the mentally ill is gone. In the future, the mentally ill will

have to learn to live with their illness.”

Norman Sartorius, president of the World Psychiatric Association, 1994

 

“We do not know the causes (of psychiatric

disorders). We don’t have methods of curing these illnesses yet.”

Rex Cowdry, director of U.S. National Institute of Mental Health, 1995

 

“No single gene has been found to be

responsible for any specific mental disorder…. There is no definite lesion,

laboratory test or abnormality in brain tissue that can identify the [mental]

illness.”

Surgeon General report, 1999

 

As one might expect, psychiatric drugs not only do not do any good,

they are actually extremely harmful: not surprising, given that the DEA

classifies some of them as Schedule II drugs, the same as cocaine. These drugs

are highly addictive with a huge black market developed for them and horrendous

withdrawal symptoms. Ritalin and

all amphetamines cause growth retardation, 10%-on-average brain shrinkage,

seizures, psychosis, tics, and Tourette's syndrome, suicides, murderous

rampages, brain tumors, deaths from such as heart attacks…the list goes on.

 

To show how psychiatry and pharmaceutical companies have teamed up to

create a cash cow, let’s consider a very SAD story: Social Anxiety Disease was invented by

psychiatrists to give shyness a “scientific label” in 1997. Fifty mentions were

made in the media of this SAD condition in 1997 and 1998, but in 1999, one

billion media mentions occurred. Ninety-six percent of these also happened to

say that Paxil was the only FDA-approved medication that could treat SAD.

Curioser and curioser, until the Washington Post reported on July 16, 2001,

that the manufacturer of Paxil, Glaxo SmithKline, had paid Cohn & Wolfe, a

public relations agency, to coordinate a multimillion-dollar marketing and

advertising campaign, to “inform thousands of people who previously did not

know they were suffering from the disorder, and spurring many to seek needed

help.” Cohn & Wolfe told the media that it was speaking for doctors and

nonprofits—not the pharmaceutical company that was paying its bills. Such

altruism is not reflected, however, in either Cohn & Wolfe’s annual

reports, in which they make it clear they are in the business of marketing, not

public health, nor Glaxo SmithKline’s 2000 annual report, in which shareholders

read that Paxil had become Number One for new retail prescriptions in the huge

SSRI market throughout the US during 2000.

 

When talking fraud, let’s also consider the story of Prozac: In 1978,

Eli Lilly, the manufacturer, knew Prozac caused suicidal and homicidal

thoughts. The German government refused to approve Prozac in 1984 because trial

results showed sixteen suicide attempts (two of which succeeded) in a group of

people selected precisely because they were known not to be suicidal. Lilly

withheld this from the FDA when it obtained approval for Prozac in the US.

Lilly then spent huge amounts of money defending itself over murders and

suicides committed under the influence of Prozac because “Lilly can go down the

tubes if we lose Prozac” (Leigh Thompson, a chief scientist at Lilly). The

FDA’s records show 28,623 adverse reactions reported, 1,089 of which were

suicides with a further 1,885 suicide attempts. As the Government Accounting

Office estimates between 1 and 10% of adverse reactions are reported to the

FDA, Prozac suicides may be as high as 108,900, with attempts at a whopping

188,500. Recent studies estimate Prozac deaths in excess of 50,000 and 7- 10%

of individuals taking Prozac experiencing some adverse reaction.

 

In its efforts to hide the truth, Lilly pressured its scientists in

1990 to alter records of physician experiences with Prozac, changing “suicide

attempt” to “overdose” and “suicidal thoughts” to “depression.” The company

settled most of the two hundred law suits over Prozac out of court, with the

terms kept confidential, and in 2002, in promoting its new version of Prozac,

stated it would not produce “suicidal thoughts and self-mutilation…one of its

more significant side effects”—an admission made only because it would help

with sales of the new product. With free, unsolicited and unprescribed samples

of Prozac being sent in the mail, Eli Lilly’s motivation and ethic level are

plain.

 

These marketing strategies

may make psychs and psychiatric-drugs companies rich and therefore powerful,

but they also seriously compromise the survival of mankind as a result of

physical problems left untreated and the widespread ingestion of toxic

chemicals that result in a host of physical problems and mental side effects ranging

from stupidity to insanity, violence to suicide. One study showed that 83% of

those referred for mental treatment by clinics and social workers were found to

have an undiagnosed physical illness. Yet psychiatrists do not conduct

searching physical examinations. They merely consult a checklist of behaviors

produced by the mental disorders section of the World Health Organization, and

label and prescribe psychotropic drugs for diseases they know to have no basis

in fact. This violates the informed consent rights of patients and is medical

malpractice.

 

Perhaps the difficulties

that psychs face stem from a fundamental confusion: That the software (mind) is

just hardware (brain) and the end user (the spirit) does not exist and so by

default is just software (which is just hardware). The concept that man is just

a bunch of atoms actually comes from the collapse of the old subject of

psychology (study of the spirit) into the subject of physiology (study of the

body) when 19th Century Swiss and German physiologists decided that

because all the nerves in the body went to the brain, then the brain must be

the mind. So was born the current fundamental theory of psychology and

psychiatry, of man as an animal, as a physical object, a bunch of atoms: you,

apparently.

 

Given this background,

let’s see how far the pharmaceutical/psychiatric cartel has progressed in

bringing about a nation (or world) on psychiatric drugs.

 

They almost succeeded during the 1950s in setting up vast psychiatric

prisons in Alaska to which anyone could be imprisoned on the signature of a

psychiatrist. In the 1960s, they began psychiatric programs in public schools

that now has one-in-five schoolchildren on mind-altering drugs, and has evolved

into the ultimate invasion: TeenScreen, the forced screening and drugging of

the entire school population of 52 million children, and six million adults in

the education system. This program has been rolled out in all but four states

at the time of this writing. It is the first step in President Bush’s 2002 New

Freedom Commission on Mental Health recommendations that all “consumers” be

screened.

 

Needless to say, one Allen Jones, an employee of the Pennsylvania

Office of the Inspector General, discovered that state officials with influence

over the implementation of the plan had received money and perks from

pharmaceuticals. Eli Lilly, manufacturer of olanzapine, one of the drugs

recommended in the plan, had the elder Bush as a member of its board of

directors, and President Bush himself appointed Lilly’s CEO, Sidney Taurel, to

the Homeland Security Council. Of Lilly’s $1.6 million in political

contributions in 2002, 82% went to Bush and the Republican Party. In the same

year, they tried to push through the Mental Health Parity Act, which required

health insurance to cover mental health treatments to the same value as

physical ills.

 

Meanwhile, half of the

U.S. populace is already on psychotropic drugs.

 

But all is not bleak. The fact is that while half the U.S. population

is drugged and with crooked politicians and unethical pharmaceuticals and

psychiatrists seeming to be closing in for the kill, they are finding

resistance building as their lies and ulterior motives and criminality are

exposed. Many who were fooled or

forced into taking the drugs are rejecting them and fighting back, with the

support of increasing numbers of vocal and effective civil, religious and human

rights groups. The British medical community has taken a bold stand by

rejecting antidepressants as dangerous, despite the false claims of the

pharmaceuticals. In the summer of 2005, even the FDA had to add black box

warnings about increased suicide risks to antidepressant drugs, an $11 billion

market in 2002. As a result of the increasing resistance, sales of

antidepressants have dropped 20% since 2002.

 

Psychiatrists and their main tool,

pharmaceutical drugs, reach into many other facets of our society and are the

single most destructive force in it. But everything they have been working

towards, most clearly stated by Rees and Chisholm, the founders of the World

Federation of Mental Health (a private organization established in 1948 that

runs National Associations of Mental Health, which in turn go about the

establishment of mental health industry facilities, agendas and programs in

each country) and quoted below, is about to come to fruition with the

implementation of the Orwellian-named New Freedom Commission on Mental

Health. Being in a drugged stupor is not mental health, and there is no freedom

connected with it—except freedom for psychs and politicians to hold sway over a

nation of docile citizens without constitutional rights, and for

pharmaceuticals to grow wealthy beyond anyone’s dreams. Already, the top ten

pharmaceuticals make more profit ($35.9 billion in 2002) than the other 490 Fortune

500 companies combined ($33.7 billion).

 

“Public life, politics and industry should

all of them be within our sphere of influence…. If we are to infiltrate the

professional and social activities of other people I think we must imitate the

Totalitarians and organize some kind of fifth column activity! If better ideas

on mental health are to progress and spread, we, as the salesmen, must lose our

identity…. Let us all, therefore, very secretly be ‘fifth columnists. [9]” J.R. Rees,

1940 speech

 

“The re-interpretation and eventually

eradication of the concept of right and wrong which has been the basis of child

training…are the belated objectives of practically all effective

psychotherapy.” G. Brock

Chisholm, 1945

 

“The family is now one of the major obstacles

to improved mental health and hence, should be weakened, if possible, so as to

free individuals and especially children from the coercion of family life.” G. Brock

Chisholm, 1948

 

“Psychologists and psychiatrists had to

become leaders in the ‘planned development of a new kind of human being.’” G. Brock

Chisholm

 

“To achieve world government, it is necessary

to remove from the minds of men their individualism, loyalty to family

traditions, national patriotism and religious dogmas.” G. Brock

Chisholm

 

The Destruction of Religion

 

Which brings us to the reason people of faith should be concerned about

current trends, and lending their support to fight on all fronts the

materialistic forces in society. The philosophy upon which modern materialism

is based is that pushed by the psychiatrist. What room is there for religion in

the world the psychiatrist and psychologist is engineering?

None whatsoever.

 

The mental health industry has been built over the last 140 years on

the premise that man is an animal. This idea shocked the religious majority

initially, which believed that man had a spiritual dimension and was

responsible for his own actions.

Two decades later, cocaine-sniffing-and-pushing Sigmund Freud was rejecting

religion as “obsolete,” a collection of superstitions and the “universal

obsession neurosis” and “an illusion [that] derives its

strength from the fact that it falls in with our instinctual desires.”

 

For his part, Charles Binet-Sangle wrote in The Madness

of Jesus, 1910, “In short, the nature of the hallucinations of

Jesus, as they are described in the orthodox Gospels, permits us to conclude

that the founder of the Christian religion was afflicted with religious

paranoia.”

 

None of these gentlemen made

much headway in drawing the common man away from his certainty that he was a

spiritual being and a man of faith. It was not until the churches of the

Western world invited the wolves into the vestries after the First World War

that the materialists began to gnaw effectively at the religious foundations of

society. Religion was seen widely as having failed to prevent the carnage of

that war. Both sides claimed to be fighting for God—“Gott mit Uns” (God is with

us!) was even engraved or embossed on the belt buckles of German soldiers. The

end result was a disillusionment both with God and with religions. And so

here is yet another irony: it was the nihilism of Nietzsche and the “man is an

animal, not a spiritual being” of psychology and psychiatry that rationalized

Count von Bismarck’s approach to man as something else that could be

slaughtered without compunction.

 

The First World War was

not so much the” last great failure of religions” requiring the introduction of

a “scientific approach to the mind of man,” as the grand entry of the mental

health industry onto the world stage, swaggering to the beat of Bismarck’s

marching bands. Perhaps the final scene of that performance set the stage for

the sequel when psychiatrist Edmund Foster implanted Corporal Adolf Hitler,

while he was hospitalized and recovering from a poison gas attack, with a

megalomaniac command during hypnosis in 1918.

 

Do you begin to see where

this is heading? If not, the following should make it clearer:

 

“We can therefore justifiably stress our particular point of view

with regard to the proper development of the human psyche, even though our

knowledge be incomplete. We must aim to make it permeate every educational

activity in our national life…. We have made a useful attack upon a number of

professions. The two easiest of them naturally are the teaching profession and

the Church: the two most difficult are law and medicine.”

Dr. John Rawlings

Rees, " Strategic Planning for Mental Health " ,

June 18, 1940

 

The implementation of the

WFMH’s overall agenda in the United States can be traced back to 1949

legislation passed through the lobbying efforts of the WFMH. This legislation established the

National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) with the purpose of conducting and

funding research on mental health issues.

While the United States has a strict separation of church and state, it

suddenly witnessed a marriage between the mental health industry (private

organizations, not government bodies) and government. Government funds

allocated to the mental health industry’s NIMH in 1949 stood at $373,221 and by 2003 had reached $1.34

billion.

 

When looking for some

reason for this exponential rise in taxpayer subsidies of the mental health

industry, need it be said that the way to obtain more government research money

is to find more and more victims of mental illness. This strategy was covered

briefly above and the recent Universal Mental Health Coverage, Universal Mental

Health Screening, and TeenScreen initiatives are among the final pieces of

legislation that will make the masters of materialism the masters of all.

 

The implementation of the WFMH agenda concerning churches was likewise

rapid and effective. Chisholm and Rees had targeted religion for “mental health

orientation,” especially through the training in psychology of the clergy.

·

By 1952, 83% of 109 seminaries and graduate theological schools in the

U.S. offered one or more mental health industry courses.

·

By 1961, 9,000 clergymen had taken “clinical pastoral” counseling

classes. The clergy were referring parishioners to community mental health

centers.

·

While in 1960, 42% of parishioners consulted their clergy for help and

only 18% went to psychs, by 1991, 38% were going to psychs.

·

Church membership dropped 25% in the US between 1961 and 1991.

 

The pedophile scandal in

the United States that so damaged the Catholic Church can also be laid in part

at the door of the many psychs who ran completely unworkable rehabilitation

programs on pedophile priests, and who, as a body, have made sexual crimes into

mental diseases to be “treated,” meaning “controlled or not,” not cured.

 

With psychiatric and

psychological programs inserted into religious communities to the extent that

training in mental health counseling is mandatory for ministers, pastors, et al.,

the perception is now common in religious communities that one must defer to

the mental health industry for effective counseling.

 

However, until religions and people of faith combine forces

and drive out the wolves, we will continue to find, for instance, situations

such as the committee in Ontario, Canada, which is proposing changes to the

Regulated Health Professions Act so that “emotional counseling” would be

restricted to psychiatrists and psychologists. This would mean clergy and

chaplains (not to mention mothers or scout leaders) would not be able to listen

to another opening his or her heart for help nor offer guidance.

Fortunately, the Multi-faith Council on Spiritual and Religious Care in Toronto

and other groups are fighting these proposed changes to ensure ministers can

still minister.

 

We will find the kind of news releases

put out on March 19, 2003 by the National Mental Health Association about

coping with the stress of war, in which they suggested Americans “Talk to

family, friends, neighbors, and co-workers about your stress and fears” and

that more serious problems “be dealt with by social workers, psychologists or

psychiatrists.” No mention is made of clergy.

 

We will find the mental

health industry’s fifth column agenda at work, such as in their current use of

the phrase “pastoral counseling” or “pastoral psychology” to describe their own

counseling. Or the 2003 funding by FEMA of Project Liberty in NY City for a

total of $33 million for counselors to talk to school children—with no clergy

involved in the project despite their superior results as counselors.

 

And where has this

“pastoral psychology” led us?

 

“It should be recognized that an acceptance of the mental health

viewpoint… carries an obligation to examine critically some of the teaching of

the churches in the light of present-day insight into what seems to be

essential to wholesome personality development and into what is now known to be

detrimental to the growing personality of the child.”

Psychiatrist – World

Federation of Mental Health (WFMH) Conference

 

“Pastoral psychology understands itself as a help for the

communities in view of ‘group dynamic’ proceedings – e.g., the processes of

rivalization, or the search for scapegoats, harmonization or shifting guilt,

which… can determine life in a community so strongly that the succession of

Jesus Christ is no longer paid heed.”

The German

Association for Pastoral Psychology Magazine – Ways To Man

 

“What is the relationship between wholeness and holiness?.… What

does personal responsibility mean in the light of the findings of

psychoanalysis? Do the words right and wrong have any further usefulness in the

light of our new knowledge of compulsive behavior patterns? I believe it’s one

of the tragedies of Christianity that it has got itself all mixed up with

morality…”

Reverend Canon Sydney Evans,

National Association for Mental Health, 1967

 

One would expect any group

to forward its tenets and agenda:

 

“…Jesus Christ might simply have returned to his carpentry

following the use of modern psychiatric treatments.”

British psychiatrist

William Sargant, 1974

 

“No one knows just how the idea of a soul or the supernatural

started… It probably had its origin in the general laziness of mankind…. This

dogma (the soul) has been present in human psychology from earliest antiquity.

No one has ever touched the soul, or has seen one in a test tube, or has in any

way come into a relationship with it as he has with the other objects of his

daily experience.”

John B. Watson,

Behavioral psychologist

 

“The soul or consciousness, which played the leading part in the

past, now is of very little importance; in any case, both are deprived of their

main functions and glory to such an extent that only the names remain. Behaviorism

sang their funeral dirge while materialism – the smiling heir – arranges a

suitable funeral for them.”

Statement delivered at the Sixth

International Congress of Philosophy at Harvard University

 

“…humanists still believe that traditional theism, especially faith in the prayer-hearing

God, assumed to love and care for

persons, to hear and understand their prayers, and to be able to do something about them, is an unproved

and outmoded faith…. Traditional moral codes…fail to meet the pressing needs of

today and tomorrow…. Promises of immortal salvation or fear of eternal

damnation are both illusory and harmful…. The total personality is a function

of the biological organism transacting in a social and cultural context. There

is no credible evidence that life survives the death of the body.” The Humanist Manifesto 2, 1973

 

 

What one would not expect

is that those a group is seeking to eradicate would agree to and assist it in

its efforts. Such bears witness to the covert, fifth column program envisioned.

The wolves came to the shepherds dressed as shepherds and the shepherds were

fooled into following and then forwarding the wolves’ agenda.

 

What has been the result

of this attack upon the church? Today, 75% of Americans do not participate in a

religion.

 

The irony in the above

evisceration of religiosity in the United States is that

 

a) the mental health lobby has persuaded the

religious community that it should defer its traditional role of counseling to

the (self proclaimed) mental health experts;

b) the mental health lobby has persuaded the

religious community that it has to study the theory and techniques of the

mental health industry in order to provide the counseling that the churches

have provided for centuries;

c) the mental health industry has

successfully hidden from the religious community that the mental health

industry is based not on science but opinions couched in complex language and

ponderous-sounding chemical names, and that its practices do not and are not

intended to produce any real improvements or cures;

d) the mental health industry has

successfully hidden from the religious community that the mental health

industry agenda for religion is to eradicate it in the quest for a “new kind of

human being.”

 

“In recent years pastoral counselors have separated from their

parishes and emerged as a psychotherapy profession…. This professionalization

process includes a shift away from parish-based counseling to counseling

centers or medical settings, declining interest in religious practices and

convictions, increased interest in psychological practices and theories, the

charging of fees, and increased institutional and professional barriers to

those individuals perceived as poor counseling clients or unable to pay…. There

is also… growing deviation from a religious orientation to a pseudo-psychiatric

orientation.” American Journal of Psychiatry, March

1986

 

“The danger is that these psychologies may, to one degree or

another, replace Christianity without most people even noticing that any

substitution has taken place.”

Christianity

Today, 1994

 

And so the upholders of

the spirituality of man, the affirmers of the existence of a Supreme Being,

trustingly assist those who oppose them with materialistic goals.

Despite the churches being

discredited falsely and membership falling, we find Gallup polls between 1944

and 1994 showing that 94% to 99% of Americans believe in God or a Universal

Spirit.

 

What happens to those who

do turn to their clergy when the chips are down? An October 2001 article in Psychiatric Times, “Research

Findings on Religious Commitment and Mental Health,” reviewed more than 70

studies done over 20 years. The findings: religion has a tremendously positive

effect on people’s mental health.

 

The truth is that religious people experience less depression and are

less likely to have problems with alcohol. Religious programs are 900% more effective at handling drug

addiction than psychiatric programs.

People who do not attend church are four times more likely to commit

suicide than churchgoers.

 

These kinds of successes

do not compel the mental health industry to support religious programs, because

their agenda is not one of improvement. Their agenda is profits, power, social

control and the affirmation of their view of man as an animal and the

eradication of the spirit of man.

 

Consider, for instance, a

letter from the head of Los Angeles County’s

Department of Mental Health dated 20 May 2003,

which thanked clergy for attending a free breakfast sponsored by a

pharmaceutical company. The pastors were encouraged to send troubled

parishioners to “mental health professionals.”

The fact that the mental health industry’s own studies prove that people

recover better with religion than drugs was never brought up at that breakfast. Nor was another key piece of the

history of recovery from mental illness: that the most successful recovery

programs ever documented gave individuals no (or minimal) drugs, but treated

them with compassion, gave them individual attention, healthy food, and

encouraged exercise and productive work.

This information is covered extensively in Robert Whittaker’s book, Mad in

America, Bad Science, Bad Medicine and the Enduring Mistreatment of the

Mentally Ill.

 

Maybe this redirecting of

those in need to the mental health industry could be justified if it had

something good and workable to offer. But when all it brings is suppressed

symptoms, no hope of cure, and unwanted side effects on a personal as well as

societal level, and all in the name of help with the force of government to

command compliance with its regimens, and all the while with the intent to

create a new kind of human being devoid of morals, spirituality, and a Supreme

Being, then there is little justification for religion continuing to acquiesce

to the one group that could be described as its mortal enemy.

 

Chemicals on the Corporate Farm

 

After World War II, chemical companies were looking for new

markets for their ramped up production during the war, and found the farm:

fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides. Thus began the beginning of the end of

mainstream organic farming. Rachel Carlson was dying of cancer in 1962 as she

wrote Silent

Spring, the book that first brought public attention to the loss of

wildlife and a healthy human food supply as a result of toxins on the farm—in

this case, DDT, a pesticide that was developed in 1939 and used to kill

malaria-bearing insects in jungles where US troops were battling the Japanese.

After the war, it was used on the farm to kill insects, good and bad, and

birds, indiscriminately. DDT accumulates in the fatty tissue of mammals,

causing cancer and genetic damage. Monsanto led the charge trying to

discredit Ms. Carlson and her book, claiming famine, disease, and insects would

follow the banning of chemical pesticides. However, her book won through as

being based solidly on science, and so was born the environmental

movement—citizens aware that industry and scientific progress needed to be

monitored and regulated in the interests of preserving the food chain and

avoiding such as cancer, genetic damage, and the loss of entire species and

their habitats.

 

Where are we today? Consider some of these snippets:

 

1. The National

Cancer Institute estimates 90% of all human cancers are caused by environmental

factors ranging from pesticides to industrial chemicals.

 

2. A century ago,

1-in-every-200 people died of cancer. Today, it is 1-in-3.

 

3. Complete

toxicity and health-exposure assessments are available for only 10% of the

pesticides and 5% of the food additives in commercial use in the U.S.

 

4. The EPA is ten

years behind in its testing program because private-contracting testing

laboratories falsified their reports.

5.

Fifteen weed species have complete resistance to Monsanto's

RoundUp, the world's most widely used herbicide. Meanwhile, scientific

studies show RoundUp damages human placental cells at exposure levels ten times

less

than Monsanto claims are safe. This herbicide/pesticide also results in

increased risk of cancer, genetic damage, and miscarriage in humans, as well as

the loss of aquatic life, including 86% of tadpoles. This is of added interest,

because RoundUp is meant to kill algae, but in reality it encourages it to

proliferate because it kills off frogs. Despite these studies, Monsanto continues

to manufacture the “safest pesticide on the market” for use on 140 million

acres of genetically engineered and other crops and woodlands around the world.

Not surprising, as 67% of its profits (as of 2001) come from RoundUp.

 

6.

In case Monsanto’s role is not clear, consider that Monsanto and

Syngenta successfully beat back an attempt by Minnesota legislators to follow

the European Union’s lead in banning the corn pesticide, Atrazine. Although

this pesticide has been directly linked to cancer, low sperm counts, and

widespread deformities in frogs, and is in our water supply, the corporations

argued that Atrazine is safe and that a ban would negatively impact their

profits.

 

7. Corporate agribusiness lobbyists

persuaded Congress in the 2005 Budget Reconciliation Bill to slash funds for

sustainable agriculture and farm conservation programs while maintaining $20

billion in annual taxpayer subsidies to the largest chemical-intensive and

genetically engineered farms.

 

Agricide is an

interesting term that refers to “soil erosion, the impoverishment and poisoning

of the soil, the pollution of lakes, rivers, and oceans from the runoff of

topsoil contaminated with chemicals, the destruction of groundwater sources

from pollution and overuse, the use of nitrogenous fertilizers that are also

implicated in the destruction of the earth's ozone layer, and the development

of fast growing, high-yield hybrid strains of crops and animals that are more

susceptible to disease. An estimated 85% of all U.S. agricultural land is used in

the production of animal foods, which in turn is linked with deforestation,

destruction of wildlife habitats, extinction of species, loss of soil

productivity through mineral depletion and erosion, water pollution and

depletion, overgrazing, and desertification.” Some more snippets, then:

 

1. Soil erosion in

the US is estimated at 2-6 billion tons a year (about 25 billion around the

world). 35 years ago, the US had lost a third of its topsoil. This may be hard

to picture, so consider the 12,000 square miles of productive land lost each

year to soil erosion and land development.

 

2. The

agricultural land that remains is being poisoned by toxic pesticides,

herbicides and fertilizers, as well as contaminated groundwater and rivers used

for irrigation. Each year, we send over one million tons of nitrogen, and

250,000 tons of potassium and also phosphorus into these water sources. Added

to this toxic load in the water supply used in agriculture is waste from

households and industries. Then there is the one and a quarter billion tons of

animal waste that contains high concentrations of drugs, arsenic, copper, and

undigested protein. Lakes, rivers, and drinking water end up with toxic levels

of trace elements as a result of soil erosion and irrigation, and metals such as

aluminum as a result of acid rain leaching them from the ground (air pollution

from such as sulfur dioxide and nitrous oxide emissions from electrical

utilities and automobiles cause acid rain). Nitrous oxide also breaks down into

photochemical oxidants, which are toxic to plants and impair photosynthesis and

thus agricultural production. As a result of this kind of pollution, forty

percent of waterfowl eggs in the San Joaquin Kesterson reservoir in California

contained dead embryos in 1981, and 20% of hatched chicks had deformities such

as no wings.

 

3. The German

chemist Justus van Liebig analyzed the ash residue of burned plants over a

century ago and found mainly potassium, nitrogen, and phosphorus. Today, we find these three artificial

chemicals being used as ingredients of fertilizers. Modern analysis equipment,

however, shows thirty times as many essential elements in plants. Adding just

three chemicals to the soil has resulted in serious imbalances in the soil and

thus food supply. So serious, in fact, that just adding crushed gravel to

animal feed and soil results in dramatically increased yields. The lack of

these essential trace minerals (from soil erosion accelerated by deforestation,

strip-mining, and intensive agriculture; and the imbalances caused by improper

fertilization) have contributed to the suppression of our immune systems and

susceptibility to any toxins and pathogenic organisms, while decreasing crop

production and resistance to disease, and impairing the health and productivity

of farm animals.

 

4. Hazardous

chemicals used as pesticides (including herbicides) and antibiotics, growth

stimulants and other drugs in animal feeds are absorbed into the animal

products and by-products we consume. Last-spray pesticide treatment of crops to

prevent spoilage; artificial ripening with gas and petroleum, wax covering of

vegetables, and food preservatives, chemicals added for color and flavor, and

to facilitate storage and freezing all add to the toxic load of our food

stream, and the market for chemicals. Consider, for instance, the spraying of

the possibly carcinogenic daminozide on apples to make them ripen uniformly and

so permit the grower to call in only one team of pickers. Or the use of arsenic

to improve the looks and stimulate the appetites of chicken. Such wanton use of

chemicals shows chemical companies looking for new markets.

 

5.

$20 billion a year in pork-barrel subsidies for the wealthiest factory

farms in the U.S., commodity exporters, and industrial agriculture

corporations. These subsidies are being pushed by politicians beholden to

lobbyists, not constituents.

 

These snippets are among thousands that it would take a book to detail

and which indicate that profits are the motive behind the continual forcing of

toxic chemicals into humans and environment alike, and those profits are then

used to bully any dissenters into silence. Thanks to Rachel Carlson and other

like-minded individuals since, those who play fast and loose with our very

survival will not enjoy their criminally gained profits in peace.

What’s

the answer to pesticides and herbicides? In part, a return to the organic farms

that were the norm sixty years ago. According to a study of organic farms in

the UK, they support one-third more birds and bats than non-organic farms.

Their greater wildlife is the result of thicker hedging, smaller fields and the

lack of pesticides. Birds and bats have always been nature’s pesticide. Other

environmentally friendly and intelligent solutions work in place of synthetic

herbicides, too.

The

Chemical Smorgasbord Experiment

 

There are 80,000 chemicals in use today in the U.S., 8,000 of them

known to be carcinogens. Yet only 600 must be reported to the Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA). Almost half of the top 3,000 chemicals in use by

volume have no testing data on their toxicity. Only about 250 have a full set

of basic test data. The EPA has reviewed almost 500 chemicals in common

consumer products, but only one quarter have been fully investigated for

toxicity. We are talking about the testing of single chemicals. Now consider

these toxins in combination. How many combinations are possible with 80,000

separate chemicals? The task of testing them is manifestly impossible. But they

do combine when they enter our bodies and are stored in fatty tissues, blood

and organs, or excreted in urine and breast milk. That is the experiment, and

it is being conducted on the entire human race. Ever wondered why cancers and

other degenerative diseases have been leaping higher and higher over the last

half century?

 

The chemical companies are not in doubt, which is why they have

been busy forcing the passage of laws that allow them to avoid disclosure and

deny liability. To date, 25 state legislatures in the U.S. have adopted laws

that allow toxic chemical releases, spills, and other environmental problems to

be kept secret (even from legislators) if the companies discover the problems

themselves during self-audits. They have placed their own in political

power—men and women who are busy representing their own interests instead of

those whom they are sworn to serve, to push through laws that weaken universal

access to clean air and water so that corporations can pollute without

liability or drains on their bottom line.

 

What do these corporations fear? That you will make the connection

between their irresponsible use and misuse of chemicals for profit and

a) the deaths each year (as reported by The Journal of the American Medical

Association) of 60,000 Americans, half of them from cancer, as a

result of synthetic chemical exposure.

b) the pollution of the entire planet—even polar bears above the

Arctic Circle are contaminated with industrial chemicals.

 

So if you do make the connection, it won’t matter, because the

laws of the land will protect their negligence and criminality.

 

One specific area worth mentioning is the wanton addition of

highly toxic chemicals to our drinking water. Even thousands of EPA scientists

are trying to stop the use of fluoride in drinking water because the

chemical causes cancer. Note that hydrofluorosilicic acid, used to add fluoride

to the water, includes arsenic, lead and other heavy metals. These lead, among

other things, to brittle bones. Currently, 68% of U.S. cities add fluoride to

their public water systems, compared with 2% of European cities. Why? Because

it is illegal for the metal plating and phosphate-mining industries to dispose

of their toxic hydrofluorosilicic acid in rivers and other bodies of water. But

they have made it legal to add it to the public water supply. Consider further

that it is illegal for pediatricians to give infants under six months any

fluoride supplements. Yet pregnant women, and infants can drink and bathe in

the water. Add to this toxic dilemma chlorine and ammonia and other chemicals

being added to the water supplies, and we find citizens around the country

denied the basic necessity of clean water.

Why is this important? Because about 64% of toxic chemicals in our

bodies enter through the pores of the skin, not our mouths, when we take a

bath, shower, or swim in a pool, or apply PCPs (personal care products).

As for PCPs, inspect the soaps, shampoos, lotions, dusting

powders, etc. in your bathroom and see if they contain any of the following

carcinogens:

·

PEGs, laureths, and ceteareths (the latter contain ethylene

oxide, dioxane, and lanolin from sheep’s wool contaminated with DDT-like

pesticides);

·

TEA (combines with nitrite to form nitrosamine);

·

Quaterniums and Diazolidinyl urea preservatives (these

break down to release formaldehyde);

·

Parabens (reduce testosterone levels, create urogenital

abnormalities, and are associated with breast cancer);

·

Sodium lauryl sulfate (damages skin, allowing easier

penetration for toxins).

The multibillion-dollar cosmetic and toiletry industry resists any

efforts at proper labeling/warning requirements, being focused instead on

“protecting the freedom of the industry to compete in a fair market place.” The

FDA has obviously been paid off, as has the American Cancer Society, which

enjoys over $100,000 in annual funding from a dozen cosmetic and toiletry

industry corporations.

 

What solutions exist for our water? Ozonators and ionizers in pools kill the algae by

eliminating its lime scale food source, raising oxygen levels that kill

bacteria and fungi. Hydrogen peroxide can be added during hot weather or heavy

use. As for water supplies, work to disconnect the chemical companies from the

water boards, and start insisting on natural solutions for combating the toxins

in the water that the chemicals were meant to solve. Until then, invest in a

very good quality water filtration system for the whole house, as well as the

drinking spigot.

 

As for PCPs, buy products with organic and natural ingredients, not

ones that sound like a lab experiment, which is what they are. For toxins in

the air, use the same sort of tools (ozonators, ionizers, HEPA filtration

systems, etc.).

 

Toxic

Recipes

 

Lastly, let’s take a brief look at the ingredients not yet covered

that food processors use when preparing and packaging our foods and drinks,

which then slide down our throats. We began this article looking at what these

large corporations wanted to regulate out of existence so they would never

slide down our throats: natural foods. Instead, they want expensive chemicals

and products that have been through their hands, denatured and made toxic, and

that promote diseases creating a large market of ill people for the

pharmaceuticals to enjoy. Whether this was part of a long-range plan or not,

the fact is, this is where we now stand as a populace cowed by corporations and

government agencies “looking after our welfare.”

 

So, here are some snippets at random that paint a dietary picture

inundated with false information and solutions:

 

1. Monosodium

glutamate (MSG) is ubiquitous in our food supply, where it is used as a flavor

enhancer to make up for the lack of flavor that food has when grown in depleted

soils and fed on junk. These days it is even used in PCPs, as well as in

fertilizers, fungicides and pesticides. It is listed under many names other

than MSG, so it is hard to spot, and its list of side effects (in some people)

reads like a Mayo Clinic compendium of physical illnesses.

 

2. Then consider

the amount of sugar routinely being added to foods and the effect that would

have on obesity as well as insulin and energy levels.

 

3.

Or consider the prevalence of soy as a protein source.

Unfermented soy is toxic, acting to block enzymes needed to break down

proteins, clotting red blood cells, increasing estrogen levels, causing

impotence, and being high in acids that prevent the assimilation of calcium,

magnesium, iron and zinc. Now look at all the protein powders, infant formulas

and other foods that utilize soy (the fermented soy products such as miso and

tamari sauces are fine).

 

4. The American Diabetic Association (ADA), which for

years has linked high sugar-diets with diabetes, suddenly denied any link in

early 2005, a month after they inked a three-year contract worth millions with

the third largest producer of soft drinks in the world. The Oregon Senate Education

Committee has rewritten a law that would have banned soft drinks from vending

machines in the state's schools, to permit them—those lawmakers instrumental in

the rewrite claim their about-face had nothing to do with the $91,000

contribution from the Oregon soft drink association to their election campaigns

in 2004. While we can marvel at Indian farmers finding colas very

effective as low cost pesticides and European mechanics using them as

degreasers for engine oil for years, we have to wonder why the ADA insists

diabetes cannot be cured, only managed with expensive treatments, and allows a

million Americans to die from it each year. Diabetes is simply the

over-acidification of the body as a result of a diet high in sugars and junk

food.

 

 

Conclusion

 

To return to George Orwell, and his colleague Aldous Huxley and his

novel, Brave

New World, we find government control of populations effected

through media misinformation and drugging them into a stupor. Consider then the

following “Newspeak” titles by the U.S. government for its most recent

initiatives:

 

Clear Skies Act of

2003, which releases more toxic mercury emissions and tons of

smog-forming nitrogen oxides into the air we breathe

 

New Freedom Commission

on Mental Health, which is designed only to drug the whole population

without its consent.

 

Let’s not be fooled or lulled into a false sense of security by

these outward appearances. Under the shepherd’s smock is a wolf licking its

chops.

 

Educate yourself at the following and other web sites. Even if you

disagree strongly about some aspect of this booklet or the stance or language

of some of these web sites, realize that we will only win if we put aside our

differences and unite to expose the criminals who have been playing god with

our health and that of the planet. We won in 1994 when the cartels tried to

make nutrients available only by prescription. Congress was impressed by the

volume of the electorate who felt strongly on this issue and every single

lawmaker voted for DSHEA (Dietary Supplement Health and

Education Act) , keeping nutritional supplements in the food category to

maintain free access. Codex Alimentarius and the flurry of US legislation to

enforce it since, are the end run by the cartels around the will of the US

people.

 

I mentioned an umbrella organization: the platform conceived has

already been thought up to some extent as the FAIR Health Agenda—making

healthier food/farming practices a priority, protecting access to dietary

supplements and all health practitioners, creating a truly integrative health

system, respecting the individual's wisdom and giving individuals full and

final responsibility for their health dollars and decision. But given the

breadth of the onslaught by chemical, pharmaceutical and biotechnology firms,

food manufacturers, psychiatrists, et al, the response needs to be widened

correspondingly. It must include more like-minded individuals and groups who

are essentially fighting the same enemies.

 

Then sound the alarm to all your friends, neighbors, and business colleagues.

You can send them this booklet.

 

The ideal for the evil people within these corporations and their

philosophy is you as a quiet, compliant consumer who, as a collection of

chemicals, they need have no qualms about harming. This type of person is not a

modern phenomenon. What is different now is that with a global market,

international conglomerates, and the destructiveness made possible through

advances in technology, we are not just talking about local suppression, but

the suppression of all life around the world. And while you would prefer to

have an inhabitable planet and to enjoy some quality of life, a life with

values and aspirations and joyousness, these people are not like you. They have

an evil streak; they seek destruction. Until we all confront this fact and

these people’s actions, we will continue to reel from their plainly

irresponsible and illogical and actually insane actions.

 

On the other hand, beating them is easy, because even though many are

in positions of power, they are an absolute minority. Even though they have

twisted the laws to protect themselves, they cannot hide behind them when the

spotlight of truth is calmly, persistently and intelligently shone on their

devious crimes. The answers are simple. Surprise them by being more than a

bunch of atoms:

 

1.

Spread the word;

2.

Practice a healthy life style personally and environmentally, favoring

real organic foods, reducing your exposure to toxic sources, and pursuing an

alternative and real-medicine health treatment system instead of a chemically

based one that merely suppresses symptoms;

3.

Join forces with all the other good people around the world, such as

those organizations listed on the following page;

4.

Working with these organizations, flood our legislators with

communications and peaceful demonstrations to change the laws to favor

sustainable and healthy ways of living;

5.

Encourage these organizations to form an umbrella organization that has

environmentalists standing side by side with organic and concerned farmers,

hunters, alternative health practitioners of every stripe and their patients,

true health food stores and nutritional manufacturers, those who believe in the

spiritual and religious dimension to man, and those who fight psychiatry’s

insidious message and control—if each group fought for every other group’s

specific goals as part of this umbrella organization, our voice would be in the

tens and even hundreds of millions—the largest constituency in the world. We

would empower the well-meaning politicians to act against their crooked

colleagues and the criminality of the few, and so we would put back on track

the benign and healthful management of each other and our natural resources.

 

Perhaps the actions of the antisocial few had to become so obviously

destructive for the silent majority to sit up, take notice, and act. While we

still have the power and resources, let’s use them.

 

Some of the Organizations Doing

Something About It

About the

Different Elements Covered in this Booklet

 

Codex

Alimentarius

www.healthfreedomusa.org

 

 

Organic Standards

www.organicconsumers.org

 

Psychiatric

Pharmaceuticals

www.cchr.org

www.alternativementalhealth.com

www.mindfreedom.org

www.prozactruth.com

www.blockcenter.com

www.antidepressantsfacts.com

www.antipsychiatry.org/

 

www.psychcrime.org

Pharmaceuticals,

Psychiatrists, and Religion

www.betterchoices.org

www.religiousfreedoms.org

 

About the Author

 

Steven Ferry is a professor, minister, business owner and social

activist with many books and articles published on a variety of topics.

 

Don’t take his word for any of the information in this booklet. The

subjects covered above require a dozen books each with 500 footnotes quoting

sources. But who would read them? Word has to reach all citizens of good will,

because empowered through understanding of the web the less well-intentioned

have weaved around them, they will be able to break free and bring about change

that will help the good and evil alike. For however much short-term wealth and

power may seem appealing, of what use are they on a planet with an atmosphere

or environment or food chain unable to sustain life?

 

Be aware that the lines you are being fed by the mainstream media are

just spin motivated by the lure of profit without risk. You don’t have to be

the victim here, or even waste any thoughts on the serious risks being

portrayed. Instead, get busy, because there IS something you can do about it.

Do the research yourself if you are skeptical, consult with experts who aren’t

receiving kickbacks from the pharmaceuticals, chemical companies, biotechnology

firms, and their crooked politicians and hired hands and spin doctors. The

author is not a doctor, but a researcher and writer who wonders “why?” when

things do not add up. He relied upon others, too numerous to credit, for much

of the primary research. You can do the same.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[1]

Pressure in the 1980s from the International Money Fund, World

Bank, and U.S. government to deregulate and privatize media and communication

systems coincided with new satellite and digital technologies, resulting in the

rise of transnational media giants dominated by nine firms (Time Warner,

Disney, Bertelsmann, Viacom and Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, TCI, GE, Sony and Seagram, with combined media sales in 1997 of about

$117 billion). A second grouping of four-dozen national or regional media

companies, such as CBS, Hearst, Gannett and Comcast make up the bulk of the

remaining media companies in the world. These companies share ownership of

concerns with their “competitors,” in effect forming cartels that control what

the world sees and hears. Their interest is not in journalism or public affairs

but commercialism (“We are here to serve advertisers. That is our raison

d'etre.” C.E.O. Westinghouse Advertising Age, 2/3/97). After World War II, the

Allies restricted media concentration in occupied Germany and Japan because

they noted such concentration promoted anti-democratic, even fascist, political

cultures.

Taken from Robert

McChesney’s The

Global Media: The New Missionaries of Corporate Capitalism,

Cassell, 1997.

 

 

 

2 The

pharmaceutical industry utilized 3,000 professional lobbyists (805 being former

federal officials, including more than 50 former members of the House and a

dozen from the Senate) to lobby our elected Federal representatives over 1,400

congressional bills between 1998 and 2005 at a cost of $759 million according

to the Center for Public Integrity. For every member of Congress in office

during this time period, there were 4.5 pharmaceutical industry lobbyists to

persuade them verbally, through media campaigns, and with funding and favors,

scoring legislative victories worth tens of billions of dollars of additional

revenue to drug companies annually. Once the Medicare

Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 takes effect in 2006, the government will be paying 41% of Americans’ drug

bills through Medicaid, the Veterans Administration and other programs (about

$40 billion annually). The lobbyists

blocked the government from negotiating prices downward and kept out imports of

cheaper medicines from Canada and other countries. The Prescription Drug

User Fee Act has resulted in pharmaceuticals paying a significant portion of

the FDA’s total budget, all to gain faster approval of new drugs being brought

to market, focusing the FDA on pharmaceutical’s interests and making the FDA

dependent on the industry.

 

 

 

[3]

Top-of-the-line

investigative writer, G. Edward

Griffin, documents in his book, World

Without

Cancer, the high-jacking

by chemical corporations (from the largest ever to exist, IG Farben, creator of

the Zyklon B gas used to exterminate millions in concentration camps during

World War II), using tax-exempt foundations and government agencies like the

FDA, of medical education and practice in order to create a drug-biased health

system that would maximize pharmaceutical profits. These corporations

joined forces in the early part of the

20th century to engineer the phase-out of natural medicines

and vitamins so they could enjoy a monopoly in the manufacture of synthetic

chemical substitutes for which they could charge much more money. Concurrently,

they steered medical schools away from natural, organic healing processes and

onto pharmaceuticals by granting funds to the medical schools that followed the

synthetic model. Fast forward a century, and we find CODEX-type rules (see the

next section) already applying in Norway and Germany, among other countries,

where reportedly zinc tablets rose from $4 per bottle to $52. Echinacea (an ancient

immune-enhancement herb) rose from $14 to $153 (and both are now allowed by

prescription only).

 

 

 

[4]

In talking of special and conflicting interests at work, consider Dr. Rolf Grossklaus, chair of one of the two committees of the

Codex Commission that impact nutrition. He stated: “nutrition is not relevant

to health.” In fact, he went further in 1994 by declaring that nutrients were

toxins and instituting the use of toxicology (Risk Assessment) to prevent

nutrients from having any impact on humans who take supplements. Looking

deeper, we find that Dr. Grossklaus owns the Risk Assessment company advising

his committee and which would gain substantially from the practice of

“assessing nutrients for the risk they pose.” While everyone else on the planet

with two brain cells to rub together considers nutrients as essential for life,

Dr. Grossklaus has misused his position to pass a law that redefines nutrients

as toxins so he can make a quick buck. How does that square with the

Hippocratic Oath?

 

 

 

[5]

US supplement usage is protected by The Dietary Supplement Health

and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA), which classifies supplements and herbs as

foods with no upper limit on their use. It was passed by unanimous Congressional

consent following massive grass-roots support organized by health food stores.

 

 

 

[6]

Toxins

include formaldehyde (a carcinogen used for preserving bodies in mortuaries, a

fungicide, germicide and disinfectant, with an OSHA exposure limit of less than

one part in a million every eight hours), carcinogenic wood alcohol (used in

antifreeze, etc. and leading to blindness and death when ingested, a fatal dose

being about 4 fl oz), formic acid (can cause severe

poisoning and death).

 

 

 

[7]

Have you

ever wondered how come China keeps developing these influenzas? It’s actually

quite simple. The Chinese raise

pigs and geese in close proximity to each other. When a pig has flu and eats

the poop of a goose with flu, the influenzas combine into a new flu. Humans

have no immunity to bird flu but luckily cannot catch it directly from birds.

But human and pig lungs and organs are similar, so pigs can transmit their flu

to humans. Several such new influenzas are generated within China and

surrounding countries each year.

 

How

do influenzas work their evil? A

single virus enters the nose or lungs, dives into a cell there and within

minutes has multiplied until the cell bursts and the viruses, covered in the

old cell material as a disguise from the body’s immune system, dive into more

cells and so the process repeats. Unchecked, there would be millions of virus

cells swarming the body within hours.

 

 

 

[8]

What does

work to handle viruses? Firstly, there is no substitute to having a healthy

diet low in toxins for creating an alkaline environment in the body. Acidic

bodies lead to diseases and breakdown of various body systems.

 

Secondly,

the human body is perfectly capable of dealing with viruses. It has for

millennia. The mechanism it employs is generating a high temperature by fever.

Any temperature over 101 degrees Fahrenheit prevents a virus from reproducing,

giving the white blood cells time to surround, eat up and expel the infected

cells before the virus is able to overwhelm the body’s defense mechanism.

 

What

does this mean you do? Simply, the moment you feel chills/shivering (which

occur within an hour of the first viral attack and which are the result of the

body withdrawing blood from the extremities so it can generate the heat for a

fever), start to cough or sneeze, or your nose starts to run, dive into bed,

stay warm, and drink lots of water to replace body fluids lost. Six-to-eight

hours later, you may not have felt overly comfortable, being achy and feverish,

but the higher temperature would have contained the spread of the virus and the

white blood cells would have done their work. Unfortunately, the

pharmaceuticals will not have made any money from your misfortune.

 

This

remedy has been used for centuries (Native Americans used sweat

lodges—saunas—to purge viruses through elevated temperatures), up to the

1940/50’s hijacking of natural health remedies by the pharmaceuticals (anyone

around then will probably remember their doctor advising bed rest, to stay warm

and to drink lots of water till the fever broke). However, thanks to real

scientific advances, there are some additional natural supplements you can take

to knock out these viruses. The H5N1 virus wipes out vitamin C stores in the

body very rapidly, reducing immune function as well as the integrity of ones

veins. That’s why those infected with such viruses bleed to death.

 

The

regimen recommended by Dr. Laibow

(www.HealthFreedomUSA.org) is to take 1,000 mg of vitamin C four times a

day; on the second day, raise the first dose by 1,000 mg.; the third day, take

the 2,000 mg dose for the first two doses, then the third day, the first three

doses are 2,000, etc. By the time your stool is soft or you have diarrhea,

reduce the doses by 75% and continue. At the same time as taking C, take 3

grams each of the amino acids l-lysine, l-proline and l-glycine and balance the

C with vitamins A and E, zinc and L-Glutathione.

 

Dr.

Laibow also recommends boosting your immune system in general by avoiding

processed foods, chemicals, synthetic flavorings, preservatives, pesticides,

sugar and artificial sweeteners that acidify your body, lowering its resistant

to viral infection. Instead, eat fruits, dark and brightly colored veggies,

free-range animal protein and organic everything. During flu season, you can

supplement your diet with selenium, elderberry syrup and garlic as known flu

busters.

 

When traveling, boost your immune system further by taking

Olive Leaf Extract, Oil of Oregano (not for pregnant women as it can cause

miscarriages), goldenseal, Echinacea, curcumin (from turmeric), probiotics, B

complex, fish oil and alpha lipoic acid.

 

 

 

[9]

“Fifth

Column” refers originally to those elements within a group that secretly undermine

it from within, pushing their own agenda or the agenda of the enemy. It was

coined during the Spanish Civil War (1936-1939) by a general as four of his

army columns advanced on Madrid. He spoke of his supporters within the capital

as his “fifth column,” furtively undermining the government from within.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2