Tuesday, May 26, 2015

Distrust of US government unprecedented: Mike Huckabee

Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee

Americans’ distrust of the US government has reached unprecedented levels as a result of the National Security Agency’s phone spying program along with recent revelations that Hillary Clinton used private servers for official emails, according to a former US governor.

“Frankly, there’s never been a time in my lifetime where people are more distrustful of government,” said Mike Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas and a US presidential candidate from the Republican Party.

Huckabee blamed the NSA and its bulk phone records collection program as a major reason for people’s distrust of the Obama administration. “If this is so effective, why hasn’t it foiled potential terrorist plots?” he asked on Fox News Sunday.

“Not one [foiled plot] has been tied to the NSA’s collection of metadata. … It seems like we’re spending billions of dollars on the whiz-bang technology and not enough on human resources, which have proven to be the most effective way of stopping terrorism,” he stated.

Huckabee noted that the NSA’s widespread phone-data collection program reveals the lack of transparency by both President Barack Obama and former secretary of state and Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

“The secrecy with which this government has operated, and specifically Hillary Clinton operating outside State Department protocol is extremely troubling,” he said.

Read more http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/05/25/412776/US-government-distrust-Mike-Huckabee

War Is A Racket by Smedley Butler

Pentagon Kills Bill To Keep National Guard Troops Out of Unconstitutional Wars

(Shane Trejo)  Threats from Pentagon officials doomed a West Virginia bill that would have blocked unconstitutional foreign deployments of the state’s National Guard troops and effectively restored the founders’ framework for a state-federal balance on the Guard.
But while the bill failed to pass, its story reveals the power and potential of this approach.
Opposition and backroom threats wouldn’t have existed if the legislation didn’t actually pose a threat to the unconstitutional status quo.
Del. Pat McGeehan (R-Hancock, 1) sponsored the Defend the Guard Act (House Bill 2168), McGeehan served as a former Air Force intelligence officer and did tours in Afghanistan and the Middle East. Ten other delegates co-sponsored this bipartisan legislation.
The bill would have prohibited West Virginia Guard units from deploying into active duty combat without an official Declaration of War from the US Congress, or as provided for under the three enumerated powers listed in the “militia clause” of the Constitution.
The story behind the bill’s demise is as fascinating as it is alarming.
McGeehan said the bill started with strong bipartisan support and things initially looked promising.
“The bill wraps the Principles of 1798, 10th Amendment values, along with pushing back against U.S. foreign policy and the war hawks that have promoted this anti-Founders vision for the last several decades. It is resistance against the Warfare State, and yet conservatives and liberals here gave it strong support,” he said. “The bill was set to run on the first committee’s agenda, as I had several more influential members of the legislature co-sponsor it with me, including two major committee chairs. The Speaker of the House even tacitly endorsed it.”
In spite of the initial momentum, the bill died shortly after Washington D.C. got wind of it. Its potential ramifications frightened the power structure. McGeehan said certain phone calls were made that brought HB2168’s progress to a screeching halt.

Monday, May 25, 2015

Fluoride: Our Daily Medication


Fluoride is a word we have all heard before. It’s in our water; it’s in our toothpaste, mouthwash, and many other things that we are probably not yet aware of. So, what exactly is fluoride and why is the government insistent that it needs to be added to public drinking water. Fluoride is a naturallyoccurring, organic compound and it can be found naturally in soil, water, food, and in several minerals and it is the 13th most abundant element on the Earth’s crust. In fact, fluoride occurs naturally in water with an average of about 1 part per million (ppm) in saltwater and around 0.01-0.3ppm in fresh water.[1]
The Centers of Disease Control and Prevention has this to say about the lovely compound Fluoride:
Fluoride is a naturally occurring mineral that is proven to protect against tooth decay.”[2]
The concept of water fluoridation was first conceived in the 1940s when scientist found that people who lived in areas with higher naturally occurring fluoride in their drinking water had less tooth decay and cavities than those who did not have the elevated levels of fluoride in their drinking water. It was discovered that on average this particular area with elevated fluoride levels had approximately 1ppm of fluoride in their drinking water. It later would be determined that fluoride can prevent and even reverse tooth decay by inhibiting bacteria in the mouth that produce acid and destroy the tooth enamel and the fluoride also enhances re-mineralization; a process in which tooth enamel is rebuilt.[3]
Grand Rapids, Michigan became the very first community to implement water fluoridation by adjusting its water supply to 1.0ppm with fluoride in 1945. By 2008, more than 72% of the U.S. population with public access to water had fluoridated water. Sounds pretty good, right? I thought it sounded a bit odd that fluoride is commonly used as a rat poison but somehow small chronic exposure to this toxic substance was deemed ok for human consumption, so I kept digging.
Water fluoridation is a process by which fluoride is artificially added to drinking water in order to aid against tooth decay – or so we are told. First off, just because fluoride is a naturally occurring substance does not mean it is safe – I’ll reference things like arsenic and mercury to make the point clear. In fact, fluoride is a highly toxic substance and has many severe side effects and is commonly used in rodenticides and pesticides to kill pests like rats and insects – we will get into this a bit later.
As I mentioned before, fluoride is a naturally occurring substance, however, with that being said I want to make this very clear: Water Fluoridation is NOT a natural process. Most the Fluoride that is added to the water supply is in fact not the naturally occurring Fluoride but rather fluorosilicic acid – abyproduct that is captured in air pollution control devices of the phosphate fertilizer industry.[4]
So, by now, you are probably asking yourself that same question I asked myself: If fluoride is a knowntoxic substance, why is it being added to our water supply and virtually every dental product on the market?
As I’ve mentioned already, the alleged benefits of fluoride is that is prevents and can reverse tooth decay, however, the only benefit that fluoride plays on dental health is through topical treatment – not ingestion – this is something that even the CDC acknowledges now.[5]
Now that we have a decent understanding of fluoride, its history, and how it is used let’s look at what fluoride is really doing to the body. Chemical toxicity can measured in two ways; either chronic toxicity or acute toxicity. As the name implies, chronic toxicity refers to a substance that can be ingested only once and be safe, but over long periods of time or repeated exposure the substance can becometoxic. Opposite of this is acute toxicity, which is a specific dose that, if consumed in one sitting, can cause immediate poisoning. For our lovely compound fluoride the acute toxicity level is 0.1-0.3 milligrams per kilogram of body weight. So let me give you a real life example of how toxic fluoride is and how easily someone, such as a child, can become poisoned.
For a child who weighs 10kg, or roughly 22 pounds, they can suffer immediate symptoms of acute fluoride poisoning by only consuming 1-3mg of fluoride in a single sitting. How might something like this happen you ask? It’s actually quite simple. It would only take this child consuming approximately 1-3 grams of over the counter toothpaste, such as the bubble-gum or fruit flavored kind marketed towards children. This 1-3grams doesn’t even account for 3% of the tube of toothpaste. Symptoms of acute fluoride toxicity include thirst, abdominal pain, vomiting, and even diarrhea. When fluoride isingested it is transformed by the stomach to hydrofluoric acid – which in turn has a corrosive effect on the epithelial lining of the gastrointestinal tract.[6] I don’t want to harp on the acute toxicity of fluoride too much as this is well documented, however, if you would like any more proof of the toxicity of fluoride, consider this; the Food and Drug Administration now requires a warning label on all toothpastes containing fluoride and the warning label


  • Mothers have become too reliant on the drugs used in labour, said doctor
  • Dr Michel Odent claimed that this puts women’s ability to give birth at risk
  • Fewer women are able to produce the hormone oxytocin, doctor added
  • This threatens ability to breastfeed and to give birth naturally, he said
Mothers are losing the ability to give birth naturally and breastfeed because their bodies have become too reliant on drugs used during labour, a leading doctor has claimed.
Dr Michel Odent believes women are at risk of losing the hormones needed to deliver children because they have been supplied by doctors via drips for so long.
The Frenchman, who championed the use of birth pools in hospitals, added that a lack of naturally produced hormones will also hinder breastfeeding.
Women are already enduring longer labours, with mothers giving birth between 2002 and 2008 taking on average two-and-a-half hours longer than those in the late 1950s.
In his new book Do We Need Midwives?, Dr Rodent said the research ‘demonstrates that women are losing the ability to give birth.’
‘That is the primary phenomenon… the number of women who give birth naturally is becoming insignificant,’ he is reported as saying by The Sunday Times. 

Police Officers Can be Sued In Federal Court If They Don't Allow People to Record Them.

The Right to Record Police


Last week, federal courts issued two decisions affirming the right of citizens to record police under the First Amendment. In Atlanta, a court held the police department in contempt of court for violating a prior court order to allow citizens to record police.

In New York, a court held that recording police is a “clearly established right” under the U.S. Constitution, and that
if a police officer violates that right, he or she can be sued in federal court.
First, in Anderson v. Atlanta, the court addressed a prior court order that had ordered the Atlanta police to implement reforms to their training policies and conduct mandatory in-person training for all officers regarding those reforms. In part, the new required policy states: “All employees shall be prohibited from interfering with a citizen’s right to record police activity by photographic, video, or audio means.

This prohibition is in effect only as long as the recording by the citizen does not physically interfere with the performance of an officer’s duties.” An officer’s violation of this policy would result in dismissal.

In the court’s contempt order, it found that the Atlanta police had not made the required changes to its policy, and therefore had also failed to implement and enforce the required changes.

Read more

Government Preparing to Seize 401(k) Pensions

Iron Sheik 05/25/2015 ECONOMIC

(Paul Joseph Watson) Economist Martin Armstrong warns that a Supreme Court ruling last week has set the stage for the federal government to begin seizing private pension funds.

According to Armstrong, the outcome of Tibble v. Edison, which found that employers have a duty to protect their workers’ 401(k) plans from mutual funds that perform poorly, will grease the skids for the feds to seize private funds and prosecute companies who manage mutual funds badly.

“Between the court ruling and the Obama administration’s push for stronger fiduciary rules,” the developments send a, “strong message that government can much easier seize the pension fund management industry of course to “protect the consumer,” writes Armstrong, warning that the ruling, “sets the stage to JUSTIFY government seizure of private pension funds to protect pensioners,” when the economy gets “messy”.

“This fits perfectly just in time for the Obama administration’s next assault as they prepare a landmark change of its own by issuing rules requiring that financial advisers put the interest of customers ahead of their own,” writes Armstrong. “This creates a very gray area wide enough to justify public seizure of pension funds under management.”

Following the 2008 financial collapse, reports emerged that the federal government was planning to seize the private 401(k) pensions of millions of Americans while enforcing an additional 5 per cent payroll tax as part of a new bailout program that would empower the Social Security Administration to redistribute pension funds “fairly” amongst citizens.

Armstrong warns that the development is part of a wider move towards “economic totalitarianism,” which is also characterized by efforts to eliminate physical cash altogether in the name of giving central banks more power.

Read more http://govtslaves.info/economist-government-preparing-to-seize-401k-pensions/

Sunday, May 24, 2015


This weekend is a great opportunity to review and reflect on what exactly the obligation of our elected officials is.  In this country, our elected individuals are selected of the people, by the people and for the people to represent the people in local, state and federal government.  These elected officials are the voice of the people and as such have an obligation to comply with the desires and wishes of the people.

In November 2011, the former Town Council played a nasty trick on the residents of this community.  The Town Council offered to put a referendum question on the ballot on whether or not the people could vote on the Municipal budget.  The people believed that the Council would honor their desires based on the results.  Unfortunately a few of the Councilors, Michael Bowie, and Fern LaRochelle, to name a couple decided that the referendum question was not binding and therefore the Council did not have to comply with the results.  The results were over 2,000 citizens were in favor and only a little over 500 were not.  Since this time, no Council has honored these results.

At a Public Hearing on the Municipal budget a few years ago, the people spoke out again a pay raise for the town employees.  The majority of the people who spoke at the Public Hearing were against this action.  However, it made no difference because Chairman Liza Ward went ahead and pushes the pay raise through resulting in a tax increase.

Now, there was another Public Hearing on the School Department budget held recently.  Once again, the majority of people spoke out in favor of the School Department budget as is.   The Council voted not to accept the School Department budget as is but to cut the budget.  Councilors Mark Lunt and Gregg Garrison voted with the people against cutting the School Department budget.

It is unbelievable that Councilors, once elected, forget about the people they represent and march to a different drum such as special interest groups.  Above is three cases, in which, the people clearly spoke as to their desires and wishes and were totally ignored by their elected officials.  The PRIMARY OBLIGATION of an elected official is to the people.  Once elected, these individuals represent the people who put them there and are obligated to comply with their desires and wishes.

This continued disregard for the desires and wishes of the people is disgraceful and weakens our form of government that so many have sacrificed so much to preserve.  Why do you think no one comes to Town Council meetings?  It is because regardless of what they say it is ignored by the Council.  So why waste the time?

Our Councilors need to take a serious look at what is their agenda and where their obligation lies and decide which is right.

Larry Fillmore

Saturday, May 23, 2015

The LAPD cop who kicked Alesia Thomas to death was recorded on dashcam saying:

“I’m going to punt you in your p*ssy.”

A video played in court for jurors Wednesday showed a Los Angeles police officer strike a handcuffed woman in the throat and use a foot to kick or shove her in the groin moments before the woman lost consciousness in the back of a patrol car.

The recording, captured by a squad car camera, showed Officer Mary O'Callaghan telling Alesia Thomas to "knock it off" as Thomas was flailing inside the vehicle. The officer threatened to "punt" Thomas in the groin, using a profanity for her genital area.

As O'Callaghan jabbed at the woman's throat with her hand, Thomas looked into the camera with wide eyes. The recording captured Thomas, who also had her legs tied with a nylon hobble restraint, repeatedly saying, “I can’t.”

The video showed O’Callaghan raise her boot and strike Thomas, whose body shook in response. A few minutes later, Thomas’ eyes closed and her head fell backward, the video showed. The recording then cut off.

Video from a dashboard camera in a different police vehicle showed O’Callaghan walking near the patrol cars. She lit a cigarette and looked inside the car where Thomas had been placed.

“That ain’t a good sign,” O’Callaghan said out loud.

Thomas, 35, was later pronounced dead at a hospital.

Read more http://www.orrazz.com/2015/05/the-lapd-cop-who-kicked-alesia-thomas.html

Harvard and Yale took Naked Photos of all their Freshmen Students

Iron Sheik 05/23/2015 Uncategorized

(Messy Nessy) Somewhere out there is a naked photograph of Hillary Clinton.

Between the 1940s and the 1970s, several ivy league colleges had a very strange requirement for all their incoming freshmen students. Harvard, Yale, Wellesley College, Vassar as well as Brown University, were among the elite American colleges that asked all the young men and women enrolled in their first year, to pose nude. Thousands and thousands of pictures were taken of students, including such notable names such as George Bush, Diane Sawyer, Meryl Streep and Hillary Rodham Clinton.

For those of you who don’t remember or didn’t catch the scandal back in 1995, a New York Timesreporter and Yale graduate Ron Rosenbaum broke the story. He wrote:

One fall afternoon in the mid-60’s, shortly after I arrived in New Haven to begin my freshman year at Yale, I was summoned to that sooty Gothic shrine to muscular virtue known as Payne Whitney Gym. I reported to a windowless room on an upper floor, where men dressed in crisp white garments instructed me to remove all of my clothes. And then — and this is the part I still have trouble believing — they attached metal pins to my spine. There was no actual piercing of skin, only of dignity, as four-inch metal pins were affixed with adhesive to my vertebrae at regular intervals from my neck down. I was positioned against a wall; a floodlight illuminated my pin-spiked profile and a camera captured it. The procedure did seem strange …But I soon learned that it was a long-established custom at most Ivy League and Seven Sisters schools … All of them — whole generations of the cultural elite — were asked to pose.

The unusual photo sessions were part of a larger project run by a scientist of psychology, William Herbert Sheldon, who conducted them in co-operation with the universities. While the general idea was that the photos were meant for the use of studying scoliosis, rickets and other posture-related deficiencies, it’s believed they were actually being used to research something rather more sinister. Strong evidence in Sheldon’s classified written material has shown that the researcher was using Ivy League freshmen students to study the correlation between a person’s body shape and their intelligence. The Nazis compiled similar archives analysing photos of body types to support their theories on race and social hierarchy.

No written permission of any kind was ever given by the students.

Read more http://govtslaves.info/harvard-and-yale-took-naked-photos-of-all-their-freshmen-students/

Cleveland Police Officer Acquitted of Manslaughter in 2012 Deaths ----- There is absolutely no excuse for this


The windshield of Timothy Russell's car was shown last month during Officer Brelo's trial. CreditAaron Josefczyk/Reuters

A Cleveland police officer who climbed onto the hood of a car after a chase and fired repeatedly at its unarmed occupants in 2012 was acquitted of manslaughter on Saturday by an Ohio judge.

The trial of the officer, Michael Brelo, played out amid broader questions about how the police interact with African-Americans and the use force, in Cleveland and across the country.

Officer Brelo was one of several officers who shot at Timothy Russell and his passenger, Malissa Williams, during a chase through the Cleveland area on Nov. 29, 2012. The chase, which started in downtown Cleveland, began after reports of gunfire from the car; prosecutors said the noise may have been the car backfiring.

More Proof Boston Bombing Was An inside Job

Florida: Gov. Scott signs evacuation gun bill into law, goes into effect July 1.

Submitted by IWB, on May 22nd, 2015

A controversial bill allowing Florida residents to carry guns during mandatory emergency evacuations has been signed into law by Governor Scott.
It allows citizens without concealed weapons permits to take their guns with them on state-ordered evacuations.
State Senator Jeff Brandes supported the bill. He said he doesn’t think if someone carries a gun in their backpack or suitcase while complying with an evacuation order that they should be treated as a felon.

The USA Freedom Act is being hyped as a prohibition of the N.S.A.’s controversial mass surveillance practices, but it actually extends the PATRIOT Act for years

The USA Freedom Act is being hyped as a prohibition of the N.S.A.’s controversial mass surveillance practices, but it actually extends the PATRIOT Act for years and opens up new avenues for more invasive forms of government spying.

In the United States, there’s a simple trick to passing legislation that egregiously violates people’s civil rights: give it a really nice-sounding name. We did it in 2001 with the PATRIOT Act, the bill that paved the way for the N.S.A. to engage in mass surveillance of online communications, and now we’re doing it again in 2015 with the USA Freedom Act, a bill that claims to reign the N.S.A. back in and end their bulk collection practices.
“Today, you will read all kinds of stories and tweets about how USA Freedom Act ends ‘bulk collection.’ It doesn’t.”
Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) tweeted that shortly after USA Freedom passed the House by a landslide, and his words could not better sum up a situation where the public and news media are being misled by U.S. lawmakers.
The USA Freedom Act is being hyped as a prohibition of the N.S.A.’s controversial mass surveillance practices, but it actually extends the PATRIOT Act for years and opens up new avenues for more invasive forms of government spying. Its passage into law would be more damaging to civil rights than if Congress did nothing at all. To understand why, it’s important to note that the N.S.A.’s practices were never lawful to begin with.
Indeed, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last week that the N.S.A.’s phone metadata surveillance program was never actually authorized by Congress. In a lawsuit with the American Civil Liberties Union, the N.S.A. sought to justify its dragnet surveillance practices by pointing to Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act, which allows the government to collect records “relevant to an authorized investigation.” But the court (and even Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, the PATRIOT Act’s original author) rejected this argument, saying the law was never meant to authorize such wide-scale data collection.
All of this should be a moot point, because Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act is set to expire on June 1 if Congress does nothing. But USA Freedom would extend this provision until 2019, and, crucially, it would tweak the language to allow the N.S.A.’s mass surveillance programs to continue, with only minor limitations.
On the surface, much of what’s in USA Freedom sounds good: a new public advocate for the F.I.S.C. court would increase surveillance transparency, and new restrictions on bulk data collection would seem to reign-in the N.S.A. Unfortunately, these restrictions are negated by a host of new privacy problems and loopholes.
The bill expands the type of data the government access from landline call data to VoIP calls, video chats and smartphone activity. The government will still be able to use broad search terms to target large portions of the population, and they can collect even more information from contacts “connected” to those targets. Companies that hand customer data over to the government will be rewarded with blanket immunity from lawsuits, even when they violate their own privacy agreements with customers. The N.S.A. will share information with the F.B.I., which can then use the information for investigations unrelated to counterterrorism. And the government can block the F.I.S.C. advocate from seeing anything they want to keep secret.

The 15 Benghazi emails you need to read POLITICO’s summary of the most interesting exchanges from Hillary Clinton’s private server.

The State Department released close to 900 pages of emails from Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary on Friday, providing a detailed looked at how an embattled agency responded to terrorist attacks in Benghazi and how Clinton, the frontrunner for the 2016 Democratic nomination for president, deals with her inner circle of advisers and well-wishers.

POLITICO read the documents to find the most insightful and telling emails. There are deadly serious moments — Clinton learning of the death of Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, for instance — and light-hearted ones, as when she jokes about her concussion. And there are political moments, with glimpses of top officials’ concerns about how the attack on the Libyan compound would affect the 2012 elections. While there doesn’t seem to be the kind of “smoking gun” that many Republicans imagined, the exchanges provide plenty of one-liners that will surely be used against Clinton when she testifies before a House panel later this year.

Here are the emails you should read:

‘The public face of Libya’

Clinton’s critics are sure to seize on this email. Jake Sullivan, a former Clinton deputy chief of staff, wrote Clinton outlining what appears to be talking points on her leadership in Libya. In that memo he declares that Clinton has been “the public face of the U.S. effort in Libya.” Sullivan, it seems, was referring to the American-led efforts to topple former Libyan strongman Muammar Qaddafi. “She was instrumental in securing the authorization, building the coalition and tightening the noose around Qadhafi and his regime.”

The document that was eventually classified

Clinton has insisted she didn’t share classified information through her email account, but the State Department concluded that one email exchange on potential arrests after the attacks was indeed classified. The document appears to have been formally classified Friday by the State Department.

Read more http://12160.info/page/the-15-benghazi-emails-you-need-to-read-politico-s-summary-of-the

Lisbon Council Meeting 5/19 Part One

Lisbon Town Council Meeting 5/19 Part Two

Town Council Meeting 5/19 ------Part Three

Wednesday, May 20, 2015

Recap Town Council Meeting 5/19

There were approximate 200 Lisbon Residents at last nights Town Council Meeting, most of whom were there to support the School and the Schools proposed new budget.

Dozens of students along with numerous teachers, parents and residents took to the podium to urge the Council to approve the proposed school budget.  While most speakers were civil a few did resort to name calling. One gentleman said " Don't send a boy to do a mans job", while looking directly at the Council Chair.  Several other people threatened the Councilors with recall or voting them out of office.  Almost all in attendance were very pro School budget.

After a couple hours of taking comments from the public the Council voted down the Schools proposed budget. The vote was 5 to 2 with Councilors Lunt and Garrison  voting to pass the budget. The Council was adamant that they didn't want to use over $300,000 dollars of excess gym bond money toward the budget. The Council also reduced by two thirds the amount of money the school wanted to use from the capital account.

This raises the question ...will the School Board have enough time to bring another budget before the Council before the June election?  If not it will cost the town approximately $3,000  for a new election.

Joe Hill