The Liberty Beacon

The Liberty Beacon

» ENVIRONMENT
 
 

ENVIRONMENT

collapse-466

by TLB Contributor: Dane Wigington

We are all immersed in a sea of deception and lies. The global power elite are using every tool they have at their disposal to hide countless converging catastrophes from public view until the last possible moment. From completely fictitious economic and unemployment figures, to Fukushima, to an all out (highly toxic) manipulation of the planet’s climate system and so much more. The mainstream media propaganda machine has been given the responsibility of hiding reality from the public at all cost, every option of deception and illusion the power structure has is being exercised at this point. Why? Because the moment the delusion of the the former reality is broken (and the gravity of what is unfolding becomes clear to populations), our paradigm will completely overturn. As populations are forced to face reality and the point of panic draws near,  those who rule the world will be more dangerous than ever before. There will very likely be some major maneuvering by the power structure very soon as they are increasingly exposed for what they are to an awakening world. Should we be concerned about military operations in the continental US like the upcoming “Jade Helm”? What do you think? So what is so wrong in the world? Is it really getting that bad? Below is only the short list.

“Jade Helm” US military drills to be carried out on US soil

Civil unrest in the US

Pentagon is preparing for civil unrest around the globe

The decline of the American Empire

Global shipping of goods and materials at all time low

Peak global oil production has already passed

A collapse of the dollar is imminent

Criminal global trade agreements are being assembled behind closed doors in preparation for collapse

Global collapse into fascism

The Great Climate unravelling

Arctic ice at record low 

Climate engineering is used to cool the eastern US in order to hide the true state of global climate meltdown

14 of the 15 hottest years on our planet have occurred since 2000

Catastrophic sea level rise 

We are currently on track for a runaway global warming scenario referred to as “Venus Syndrome”

We are already free falling into Earth’s sixth mass extinction

A list of mass animal and fish die-offs around the globe (constantly updated)

Fukushima meltdown

Destroyed ozone layer due to climate engineering

Global oxygen content is declining

Arable land is declining rapidly around the globe

All this is only a sample of what is unfolding around us.
Those that don’t want to believe any of this is real can easily find some source of information to tell them everything is OK. They can find someone to tell them that those who are sending out the warnings are just “alarmists”. Any who choose to go down the road of denial should not get too comfortable, there will be no hiding from the gathering storm. The world desperately needs individuals who are determined to take the road less travelled. It needs those who choose to take the path of deciding to be a part of the cure and who refuse to succumb to the diseases of fear, denial, apathy, and inaction. Which road will you choose? Make your voice heard in the fight for the common good while there is yet time to make a difference, tomorrow will be too late.

DW

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

See featured article here

TLB highly recommends you visit Dane at GeoEngineering Watch

Anti_GMO_Hawaii

By TLB Contributor: Paul Fassa

In November 2014, Maui citizens and activists managed to push through a moratorium on herbicide and pesticide testing until full disclosure of the chemicals environmental impact on humans, animals, soil, and water is known.

Currently, Dow Chemical and Monsanto are “testing” by spraying indiscriminately throughout the second largest island of Hawaii. Maui County Council also demanded full third party examination of the chemicals long term effects on the soil and water.

The Hawaiian island of Maui is a destination for true nature lovers, and the people there know it and want to preserve their land while not being poisoned by the biotech industry’s open field experiments. Maui citizens want to determine the environmental toxicity of those chemicals being used by Monsanto and Dow Chemical on over the thousand acres of land they own or lease on Maui.

Maui’s residents got their local legal wish for a moratorium on testing until their demands can be satisfactorily met. But Monsanto immediately initiated an appeal. The first federal judge assigned for the case, Judge Barry Kurren, had too many obvious conflicts of interest. So he was replaced by Federal Judge, Susan Oki Mollway, who may have certain compromising issues as well. But they aren’t in view.

monsanto_pollutes

The possibility of her position being compromised comes with that fact that the declaration to repeal the moratorium issued by Monsanto’s Sam Eathington has many lines redacted, completely blacked out. Judge Susie has the original unredacted copy, but the defendant, the Maui county council, does not and will not by Monsanto’s request.

The Maui county moratorium is meant to ban biotech testing until the chemicals being tested could be isolated and examined by independent third party toxicologists.

What kind of court hearing will that offer? Totally unfair is obvious. It completely throws a damper on the defendant’s (Maui county) ability to engage in pretrial discovery, a common legal practice of determining what information the other side has.

The redacted lines appear in areas of the text that may expose exact locations among Monsanto’s several hundred acres of testing grounds in Maui and disclose the chemicals being used in their testing. Secrets perhaps worthy of chemical warfare production.

That’s the crux of the issue, the main reason the citizens of Maui had managed to pass the moratorium on GMO testing was to protect themselves from chemicals that were being sprayed in their area until an independent third party environmental impact study was performed.

But the heavily redacted document that Monsanto and its current GMO allies goes on and on with how valuable the testing is to produce seeds that will save the planet’s crops and how many are currently employed that will be affected by a moratorium. Great PR material for ignorant or corrupt judges. But there are no visible statements on the document that refer to chemicals. See for yourself here.

The Essential Motivation of GMO Activity is Not to Feed the World

US-veteran-Vietnamese-AGENT-ORANGE

Monsanto and Dow have avoided Agent Orange culpability or liability

Few realize that Monsanto, Dow Chemical, Syngenta, and others are not and have never been agricultural enterprises. They have always produced toxic chemicals that kill and destroy. Among them is Monsanto-Dow Chemical’s collaboration on Agent Orange, the defoliant used on Vietnamese jungles to expose Vietcong positions that affected many civilians and American soldiers with permanent illnesses and deaths.

The whole point of creating GMOs is to create plants and crops that can resist chemicals toxic to weeds and pests. That’s so they can forcibly sell more chemicals, including those with glyphosate as their active ingredients. And that’s how they intend to control the food chain completely.

I think you may know about the WHO’s recent multinational scientific finding that glyphosate is a “possible carcinogenic”. And the fact is, according to independent research, that as bad as glyphosate is, the “inactive” chemicals that are used to boost glyphosate efficacy are worse individually or create a worse synergy all together.

And the industry’s counsels use “Trade Secret” laws to keep those ” inactive” ingredients from being disclosed. That’s part of what the Maui citizens want to investigate further during the moratorium.

Now the latest turn of events with the Monsanto suit to withdraw the Maui moratorium is going to be be heard in a Federal Court and not a State Court. This keeps the state of Hawaii from sympathizing with their Maui citizens and turns it over to the GMO friendly Federal Government wolves.

GMO-wars-between-DuPont-Monsantto

The Core of the Pro GMO Federal Wolf Pack

The current head of the USDA, Tom Vilsack, was voted biotech industry’s governor of the year while he was governor of Iowa. The Obama Executive Branch has former attorney, VP, and lobbyist Michael Taylor as it’s “Food Czar” and chief FDA consultant. Supreme Court Justices Elena Kagan and Clarence are both pro GMO with industry affiliations.

For more details on how the deck is stacked for the Federal Government to usurp control over local decisions to curb GMOs, go here.

Credit goes to veteran investigative journalist Jon Rappoport of nomorefakenews.com whose constant following of the Maui GMO moratorium efforts I have summarized. A government that overrules local decisions to manage their affairs and rules in favor of corporate interests is fascist – that’s not hyperbole. That’s what it is exactly.

 ################

Paul Fassa is a contributing staff writer for REALfarmacy.com and a contributor to The Liberty Beacon project. His pet peeves are the Medical Mafia’s control over health and the food industry and government regulatory agencies’ corruption. Paul’s valiant contributions to the health movement and global paradigm shift are world renowned. Visit his blog by following this link and follow him on Twitter here.

Sources:

https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2014/11/26/exposed-the-judge-in-the-monsanto-maui-lawsuit-is-tainted/

https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2015/04/10/revealed-a-secret-monsanto-document-in-the-maui-gmo-case/

https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2015/04/16/why-i-keep-writing-about-monsanto-vs-maui/

https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2015/04/10/revealed-a-secret-monsanto-document-in-the-maui-gmo-case/

https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2014/11/05/election-bang-maui-bans-gmo-crops/

http://www.vox.com/2014/11/7/7170993/maui-just-banned-gmo-farming-will-it-hold-up-in-court

Image credits:

http://www.commondreams.org/sites/default/files/styles/cd_large/public/headlines/monsanto_pollutes.jpg?itok=DCtNv8jR

http://www.seattleorganicrestaurants.com/vegan-whole-foods/images/GMO-wars-between-DuPont-Monsantto.jpg

http://www.seattleorganicrestaurants.com/vegan-whole-foods/images/US-veteran-Vietnamese-AGENT-ORANGE.jpg

################

TLB recommends you visit REAL farmacy for more pertinent articles and information.

See featured article and read comments HERE

desert-466

by TLB Contributor Dane Wigington

Richard Williams (better known as Prince Ea), is a rapper and activist that has done a great deal to expose reality for the sake of the common good. The six minute video below is exceptional and well worth the time to view. Take note of the aerosol sprayed skies in the background of this video, this is the elephant in the room that overshadows ALL other environmental issues. Though the message from Prince Ea is extremely important, we should all reach out to Prince and the foundations he represents to inform them that they are omitting the single most environmentally destructive factor of all, global climate engineering. Richard has a massive following, he would be an extremely important ally in the battle to expose and halt climate engineering if we could wake him up to this issue. His contact is HERE , I hope all will take the time to pen an articulate and sincere message to Richard about the ongoing geoengineering nightmare in our skies. Let’s all keep sounding the alarm.

Read article here: http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/war-against-nature-is-a-war-against-ourselves/

TLB recommends you visit Dane at GeoEngineering Watch for more great/pertinent articles.

viles-466

By Allegra Kirkland

A new documentary reveals how the $770 billion chemical industry is pumping dangerous substances into our lives.

Back in 1974, the agricultural multinational Monsanto developed a class of herbicides using glyphosate as the key ingredient. By the 1990s, the company had created corn, soy and cotton seeds genetically altered to resist glyphosate herbicides, meaning farmers could kill weeds without fearing for the health of their crops. Today, Monsanto’s Roundup is the most widely used weed-killer in the world.

One problem: we now know with certainty that glyphosate is carcinogenic to humans and animals. Though Roundup has been plagued by controversy for years, a report released this March by scientists affiliated with the World Health Organization definitively linked the herbicide to increased risks for non-Hodgkin lymphoma, as well as DNA and chromosomal damage in mammals.

Roundup is only one of tens of thousands of chemicals we encounter every day in our food, clothing, furniture, electronics and cosmetics. Over 84,000 chemicals are used in U.S. commerce, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, most of which have never been tested for potentially toxic effects on human and wildlife health and the environment. The Human Experiment, a new documentary narrated by Sean Penn and directed by journalists Dana Nachman and Don Hardy, takes a wide-angle view on the health risks perpetuated by the chemical industry, and demonstrates how in their eyes we’re all just guinea pigs available for testing.

The documentary uses three case studies to provide a sampling of the potential health consequences of sustained chemical exposure. Marika Holmgren is an active, non-smoking Bay Area woman with no family history of cancer who receives a diagnosis of advanced breast cancer at age 37; Jenn Canvasser is a healthy young woman who discovers she has polycystic ovarian syndrome and endures several difficult, expensive rounds of IVF treatments as she and her husband try to conceive; and Hannah Cary, whose brother is severely autistic, is an advocate at the Autism Society of America. The subjects and filmmakers make the case that chemicals in the environment are responsible for these health conditions, and there is plenty of unnerving science to back up their fears.

Many of the professors and scientists interviewed in the film point to rising rates of cancer, learning disorders and infertility that cannot be fully explained by genetic drift or changes in diagnostic criteria. Breast cancer rates have gone up more than 30 percent in both men and women since 1975. Rates of asthma have increased by 80 percent in the last 45 years, and ADHD has increased by 53 percent. As Sean Penn narrates, these conditions “are all on the rise since the dawn of the chemical revolution.”

But correlation and causation are not the same thing, as any scientist (or journalist) knows. In the case of women like Jenn Canvasser, there could be many other environmental and genetic factors at play. Like 6.5 million other women in the U.S., Canvasser has trouble conceiving. When she finally gives birth to twins after multiple rounds of IVF treatments, both are plagued by health problems and one eventually dies after a few short, hospital-ridden months. Her story is heartbreaking, but at no point is her or her sons’ condition explicitly linked to chemical exposure. Instead, the filmmakers say “Numerous studies associate adverse pregnancy outcomes with toxic chemicals including pesticides, DDT, PCBs and BPA.” Again and again, they hammer home the connection between rising rates of disease and chemical usage, but the strongest language they use is “linked to” or “associated with.”

Still, consumers and health advocates undoubtedly have cause for concern, as the Roundup controversy shows us. Over the past several decades, the chemical industry has repeatedly demonstrated a blatant disregard for public health. Existing and new chemicals are supposed to be monitored by a 1976 law known as the Toxic Substances Control Act. But loopholes in its language mean that companies don’t have to test chemicals before including them in consumer products and make it very difficult for the EPA to pull hazardous chemicals from the market. Sixty-two thousand chemicals, including toxic substances like asbestos, were grandfathered in under the law, assumed safe because they were already in use. Essentially, the TSCA functions as little more than a long list of known chemicals, and consumers have no way of knowing which products contain flame retardants, formaldehyde, cadmium, or other chemicals that can be toxic to humans and animals.

As David Rosner, a professor at Columbia’s Mailman School of Public Health, says in the film, there have been “real mistakes, major mistakes where we allowed these industries to get away with murder.”

The lack of available information about the linkages between chemicals and disease is partly the design of the $770 billion chemical industry. Dow, Exxon and other major firms spend millions each year lobbying Washington for favorable legislation and funding the campaigns of industry-friendly representatives. In the late 1990s, bisphenol A, an endocrine-disrupting chemical that mimics estrogen and can lead to health problems ranging from obesity to infertility, was discovered to be in many hard plastics. These everyday products included everything from baby bottles to Tupperware. During the ensuing public outcry, chemical industry trade groups released a rash of bunk studies, insisting that BPA is safe for humans at the levels to which we’re exposed.

A great deal of work needs to be done to combat the industry’s influence, and The Human Experiment tracks the difficult, mundane efforts being made by health advocates, families and legislators to obtain stricter consumer protection laws. But this is only one angle pursued in the sprawling film, which tries to cover far more ground than its hour-and-a-half run time allows. By taking on the “chemical industry” as a whole, the filmmakers can only spend a few minutes discussing a particular chemical, or case study, before moving on to the next. This overly sweeping approach, paired with a lack of hard research connecting specific chemicals to specific health problems, can make the film somewhat juvenile at times, a documentary that basically boils down to the thesis “chemicals are dangerous.”

Yet despite this broad focus, there are notable absences in the film. With the exception of Maria Cruz, a housecleaner who immigrated from Mexico with her two children, almost all of the interview subjects are middle-class white people who have the financial resources to afford needed medical care and combat ineffective legislation. Little mention is made of the disproportionate effects of toxic chemicals on minorities and the working class, or of heavily polluted areas like Louisiana’s Cancer Alley, where the wastes pumped out by surrounding petrochemical refineries have caused high rates of miscarriages, cancer and other diseases.

The real takeaway of the film is one that aligns quite closely with the values of middle-class white America: learning how to be a better consumer. Jenn Canvasser and Marika Holmgren now both work as consumer protection advocates, warning people of the dangers of toxic chemicals in their makeup and home furnishings. Consumer protection efforts are certainly admirable, but after gaining even a cursory understanding of the public health risks perpetuated by the chemical industry, learning how to make more educated decisions about which bar of soap to purchase isn’t exactly an inspiring rallying cry.

The Human Experiment – Trailer from FilmBuff on Vimeo.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Read article here: http://www.alternet.org/personal-health/modern-life-frightening-experiment-how-much-exposure-we-can-take-toxic-chemicals

TLB recommends you visit ALTERNET for more great/pertinent articles.

 

ocean-die-off

By: Mac Slavo

Recently Michael Snyder warned that the bottom of our food chain is going through a catastrophic collapse with sea creatures dying in absolutely massive numbers. The cause of the problem is a mystery to scientists who claim that they can’t pinpoint how or why it’s happening.

What’s worse, the collapse of sea life in the Pacific Ocean isn’t something that will affect us several decades into the future. The implications are being seen right now, as evidenced by an emergency closure of fisheries along the West coast this week.

On Wednesday federal regulators announced the early closure of sardine fisheries in California, Oregon and Washington. According to the most recent data, the sardine populations has been wiped out with populations seeing a decline of 91% in just the last eight years.

Meeting outside Santa Rosa, California, the Pacific Fishery Management Council voted to direct NOAA Fisheries Service to halt the current season as early as possible, affecting about 100 fishing boats with sardine permits…

The action was taken based on revised estimates of sardine populations, which found the fish were declining in numbers faster than earlier believed…

The council did not take Wednesday’s decision lightly and understood the pain the closure would impose on the fishing industry, said council member Michele Culver, representing the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. She added that it was necessary because a new assessment of sardine stocks showed they were much lower than estimated last year, when harvest quotas were set.

Source: New York Times via Steve Quayle / ENEnews

Sardines, like honey bees, don’t seem important to the casual observer. But just like honey bees, which are experiencing their own colony collapse, they are critical to the propagation of the global food chain. The immediate effects can be seen on the creatures next in line:

90 percent of this year’s class of sea lion pups were starving for lack of sardines to eat.

The sardine populations have crashed 91 percent since 2007,” he said after the vote. “We would have liked to see this happen much sooner, but now we can start to rebuild this sardine population that is so important to the health of the ocean.”

ocean-food-web(Courtesy: The Seattle Times)

But even closing of commercial fisheries may not be the solution. As Snyder points out in the aforementioned report, there are some unexplained phenomena occurring in the Pacific ocean and either scientists don’t have a clue what is happening, or someone is keeping a gag order on researchers.

According to two University of Washington scientific research papers that were recently released, a 1,000 mile stretch of the Pacific Ocean has warmed up by several degrees, and nobody seems to know why this is happening.  This giant “blob” of warm water was first observed in late 2013, and it is playing havoc with our climate.  And since this giant “blob” first showed up, fish and other sea creatures have been dying in absolutely massive numbers.

The issue could potentially be one of climate change – but not the kind of climate change we hear from politicians who just want to put carbon tax credits in their pocket. Rather, we could be talking about cyclical climate shifts that have occurred regularly throughout the course of earth’s history. And with those shifts come massive migrations and species die-offs.

Or, as one contributor at ENEnews.com suggested, the answer to why this is happening should be obvious:

We have three cores melted out of their reactor buildings, lost in the mudrock and sandstone, which we have failed to locate and mitigate.

We have an underground river running under the ruins, which we have failed to divert around the reactors.

We have three empty reactors, containing nothing but corium splatter left when they blew up and melted out.

We have the Pacific Ocean Ecosystem, which we have stressed beyond endurance, through ocean dumping, over fishing, agricultural runoff, and now unrestricted radiation.

We have the sudden collapse of the Pacific Ocean Ecosystem, with a threatened collapse of the biosphere.

We continue to allow corporate and governmental inaction.

What in hell did you think was going to happen?

Something is wrong with world’s food chain and one Harvard Professor suggested last year that recent signs, namely with the die-off of honey bee populations, are a prelude of things to come:

But he now warns that a pollinator drop could be the least our worries at this point.

That it may be a sign of things to come – bees acting as the canary in the coalmine. That not only are we connected to bees through our food supply, but that the plight that so afflicts them may very well soon be our own.

Could it be that the collapse of honey bee colonies, mass sea life die-offs, and changing climates in once lush growing regions are all the result of the same underlying phenomena?

If so, then we can soon expect not just higher food prices, but a breakdown in the food chain itself.

And though none of us can truly prepare for a decades’ long (or longer) food disaster and the complexities that would come along with it (like mass migrations and resource wars), we can take steps to make ourselves as self sustainable as possible, while also preparing emergency plans to respond to the initial brunt of the force should it hit.

################

TLB recommends you visit SHTF plan for more pertinent articles and information.

See featured article and read comments HERE

Pesticides-466

by Christina Sarich

Another example of Roundup carcinogenicity

About 30 years of research regarding non-Hodgkin lymphoma (cancer) and its correlation with occupational exposure to 80 agricultural pesticides and 21 chemical groups has linked glyphosate, the main ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup, with cancer of the lymph tissue.

In a paper published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 44 papers representing studies in high-income countries found that there was a “striking increase” in the incidence of non-Hodgkin’s type lymphomas in the last 30 years.

The paper explains that farmers have high cancer rates, overall, and agrochemical exposure is likely the culprit, even among a group that normally has low across-the board mortality rates.

Among the pesticides studied, glyphosate exposure was found to be positively associated with a particular type of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma – called B cell lymphoma. This best-selling toxin distributed primarily by Monsanto is just the tip of the iceberg, as pointed out by  Sayer Ji of GreenMedInfo.

The inactive ingredients in Roundup have also been found to be carcinogenic even in the parts per trillion range, so the study brings attention to a phenomenon which was already coming to light in the scientific community.

The fact is, human blood is not ‘Roundup Ready.‘ As mentioned, the ‘inactive’ ingredients in Roundup are just as harmful, making ‘RoundUp Ready’ chemicals a toxic blood-venom none of us can ignore. The background context of one study are described:

“Today, the dissemination of glyphosate in the environment increases, and humans are permanently exposed to its action. Worst case scenario provides even ten-fold increase of using a glyphosate in the following years [32].

Considering the widespread and frequent use of glyphosate throughout in world, thus the current risk assessment is important because the exposure will concern not only the users of the preparations containing glyphosate, but also those who do not have direct contact with that herbicide.”

As these chemicals are used in a slap-dash cocktail, understudied, and haphazardly applied to our crops, it is no wonder that different types of cancers are showing up in the populations most closely tied to their use – such as with farmers, their families, and even children who go to schools or playgrounds near fields that are sprayed.

Lymphomas are a special type of cancer that attack the immune system. It would only be logical that pesticides and herbicides which also attack a plant’s immune system would be adverse to our own. That they are also creating organisms that are immune to the toxicity of these concoctions should be alarming. When cancer cells are stronger than our own healthy cells, perhaps the agencies allowing GM crops to exist will finally listen.

 

ChristinaSarich
About Christina Sarich:
Christina Sarich is a humanitarian and freelance writer helping you to Wake up Your Sleepy Little Head, and See the Big Picture. Her blog is Yoga for the New World. Her latest book is Pharma Sutra: Healing the Body And Mind Through the Art of Yoga.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Read article here: http://naturalsociety.com/roundup-chemicals-linked-to-cancer-of-the-lymph-system/

TLB recommends you visit Natural Society for more great articles and pertinent information.

Dolphin-jumping-466

by Asahi Shimbun, Apr 11, 2015 (emphasis added):

Interruption of blood supply leading to death of tissue — Disease has been linked to radiation exposure

  • Google Translate: Ibaraki Prefecture… for a large amount of dolphin which was launched on the shore… the National Science Museum… investigated… researchers rushed from national museums and university laboratory, about 30 people were the anatomy of the 17 animals in the field. [According to Yuko Tajima] who led the investigation… “the lungs of most of the 17… was pure white ischemic state, visceral signs of overall clean and disease and infections were observed”… Lungs white state, that has never seen before.
  • Systran: The National Science Museum… investigated circumstance and cause etc concerning the mass dolphin which is launched to the seashore of Ibaraki prefecture… the researchers ran from the museum and the university laboratory… approximately 30 people dissected 17… [Yuko Tajima] of the National Science Museum which directed investigation research worker [said] “the most lung 17 was state with true white, but as for the internal organs being clean”… The lung true white as for state, says… have not seen.

Fukushima Diary, Apr 12, 2015: According to National Science Museum, most of the inspected 17 dolphins had their lungs in ischaemia state… The chief of the researching team stated “Most of the lungs looked entirely white”… internal organs were generally clean without any symptoms of disease or infection, but most of the lungs were in ischaemia state. She said “I have never seen such a state”.

Wikipedia: Ischemia is a vascular disease involving an interruption in the arterial blood supply to a tissue, organ, or extremity that, if untreated, can lead to tissue death.

Many reports have been published on the links between ischemia and radiation exposure:

  • “It has been shown that the ionizing radiation in small doses under certain conditions can be considered as one of starting mechanisms of… IHD [ischemic heart disease].” -Source
  • “Radiation risks on non-cancer effects has been revealed in the [Chernobyl] liquidators… Recently, the statistically significant dose risk of ischemic heart disease… was published.” -Source
  • “Incidence of and mortality from ischemic heart disease (IHD) have been studied in a cohort of 12210 workers [at] Mayak nuclear facility… there was statistically significant increasing trend in IHD incidence with total external gamma dose.” -Source
  • “Numerous studies have been published concerning non cancer diseases in liquidators… Risk of ischemic heart disease… seems increased.” -Source
  • “In 1990 the International Chernobyl Project has been carried out under the aegis of the IAEA… It is known that the international experts who had taken part in the International Chernobyl Project were aware of the report by the Minster of the Ministry of Health Care of Belarus delivered at an informal meeting arranged by the IAEA… The Belorussian Minister reported about… the worsening of the general health state of the affected population… “Among adults in 1988 there was a two- to fourfold increase, in comparison with preceding years, in the number of persons suffering from… ischemic heart diseases” -Source
  • “In a study on a Russian cohort of 61,000 Chernobyl emergency workers… a statistically significant risk of ischemic heart disease was observed.” -Source

Read article here: http://enenews.com/dead-dolphins-washed-fukushima-entirely-white-lungs-head-scientist-ive-never-before-interruption-blood-supply-leading-tissue-death-disease-linked-radiation-exposure-large-spike-after-chernoby

TLB recommends you visit ENENEWS for more great/pertinent articles.

gmo-apple-466

by GM-Free Cymru, Special Report

According to evidence unearthed from the archives of the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) in the United States, it has been established that Monsanto was fully aware of the potential of glyphosate to cause cancer in mammals as long ago as 1981.

Recently the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) issued a statement in which glyphosate (the main component of Roundup herbicide) was classified as “probably carcinogenic” to humans and as “sufficiently demonstrated” for genotoxicity in animals (1). This announcement of a change to toxicity class 2A was given vast coverage in the global media, causing Monsanto to move immediately into damage limitation mode. The corporation demanded the retraction of the report, although it has not yet been published! Predictably, there was more fury from the industry-led Glyphosate Task Force (2). This Task Force also sponsored a “rebuttal” review article (3) from a team of writers with strong links with the biotechnology industry; but because of the clear bias demonstrated in this paper (which suggests that glyphosate has no carcinogenic potential in humans) it is best ignored until it has been carefully scrutinized by independent researchers (4).

With Monsanto continuing to protest that glyphosate and Roundup are effectively harmless (5) if used according to instructions, in spite of accumulating evidence to the contrary, we undertook a search through Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) records with a view to finding out what was known about glyphosate at the time of its initial registration. This followed up earlier investigations by Sustainable Pulse which highlighted a sudden change in the EPA view on toxicity in 1991. What was discovered was very revealing. There were many animal experiments (using rats, mice and dogs) designed to test the acute and chronic toxicity of glyphosate in the period 1978-1986, conducted by laboratories such as Bio/dynamics Inc for Monsanto and submitted for EPA consideration. Two of these reports relate to a three-generation reproduction study in rats (6) (7), and another is called “A Lifetime Feeding Study Of Glyphosate In Rats” (8); but like all the other older studies they were and still are treated as Trade Secrets and cannot be freely accessed for independent scrutiny. That in itself is suggestive that the studies contain data which Monsanto still does not wish to be examined by experts in the toxicology field. It is also deeply worrying that EPA acceded to the routine Monsanto requests for secrecy on the flimsiest of pretexts.

However, archived and accessible EPA Memos from the early 1980’s do give some indications as to what the rat studies contain (9). Although the studies predate the adoption of international test guidelines and GLP standards they suggest that there was significant damage to the kidneys of the rats in the 3-generational study — the incidence of tubular dilation in the kidney was higher in every treated group of rats when compared to controls. Tubular dilation and nephrosis was also accompanied by interstitial fibrosis in all test groups and in some of the lumens the researchers found amorphous material and cellular debris. Less than a third of the control rats showed signs of tubular dilation. In the rat study results, the changes in the bladder mucosa are significant because metabolites, concentrated by the kidneys, have led to hyperplasia that could be considered as a very early and necessary step in tumour initiation. EPA was worried in 1981 that these indications were sinister, and at first declined to issue a NOEL (no observed adverse effect level) — it asked for further information and additional research. In its 1982 Addendum, Monsanto presented evidence that minimised the effects and confused the data — and on that basis EPA accepted that glyphosate was unlikely to be dangerous. But Monsanto knew that scrutiny of the data in the studies would potentially threaten its commercial ambitions, and so it asked for the research documents concerned to be withheld and treated as Trade Secrets. So there was no effective independent scrutiny. Monsanto and EPA connived in keeping these documents away from unbiased expert assessment, in spite of the evidence of harm. (It is clear that EPA was thinking about carcinogenic effects — it knew in 1981 that glyphosate caused tumorigenic growth and kidney disease but dismissed the finding as “a mystery” in order to set the NOEL for the chemical and bring it to market.)

In the rat studies, the glyphosate doses fed to the test groups were 1/100 of those used in a later mouse study (9). It is unclear why these very small doses were decided upon by Monsanto and accepted by EPA, since there must be a suspicion that the studies were manipulated or designed to avoid signs of organ damage. In its 1986 Memo, EPA remarked on the very low doses, and said that no dose tested was anywhere near the “maximally tolerated dose.” Then the Oncogenicity Peer Review Committee said: “At doses close to an MTD, tumours might have been induced.” A repeat rat study was asked for. However, BioDynamics (which conducted the research for Monsanto) used data from three unrelated studies, which they conducted in house, as historical controls to create “experimental noise” and to diminish the importance of the results obtained by experiment.

In a 1983 mouse study conducted by Bio/dynamics Inc for Monsanto (10), there was a slight increase in the incidence of renal tubular adenomas (benign tumours) in males at the highest dose tested. Malignant tumours were found in the higher dose group. However, “it was the judgment of two reviewing pathologists that the renal tumors were not treatment-related”. Other effects included centrilobular hypertrophy and necrosis of hepatocytes, chronic interstitial nephritis, and proximal tubule epithelial cell basophilia and hypertrophy in females. The EPA committee determined there was a “weak oncogenic response” — so evidence was suggestive of early malignancy. The EPA Science Advisory Panel was asked for advice, and they said the data were equivocal and called for further studies in mice and rats. A further report was delivered in 1985. Part of the reason for this dithering was the prevalent but false EPA belief that all physiological effects had to be dose-related: namely, the higher the dose, the greater the effect.

Even though pre-cancerous conditions were imperfectly understood 35 years ago, and cortical adenomas in kidney were not thought dangerous at the time, the evidence from the Memos is that Monsanto, BioDynamics Inc and the EPA Committees involved were fully aware, probably before 1981, of the carcinogenic potential of glyphosate when fed to mammals. In the Memos there are references to many more “secret” animal experiments and data reviews, which simply served to confuse the regulators with additional conflicting data. Thus EPA publicly accepted the safety assurances of the Monsanto Chief of Product Safety, Robert W. Street, and the status of the product was confirmed for use in the field (11). But behind the scenes, according to a later EPA memo (in 1991), its own experts knew before 1985 that glyphosate causes pancreatic, thyroid and kidney tumors.

On the EPA website (last updated 31.10.2014) reference is made to five Monsanto studies of 1980 – 1985, and it is noteworthy that these studies have not been made public in the light of current knowledge about malignant tumours and pre-cancerous conditions (12). Neither have they been revisited or reinterpreted by Monsanto and EPA, although one 1981 rat study and one 1983 mouse study are mentioned in the recent review by Greim et al (2015) (3). Following the conclusion that glyphosate was “not classifiable as to human carcinogenicity” nothing in the EPA advice about this chemical has changed since 1990. Given the recent assessment by the WHO Panel, and given the flood of scientific papers relating to health damage associated with glyphosate (13) the EPA attitude smacks of complacency and even incompetence.

Speaking for GM-Free Cymru, Dr Brian John says: “The evidence shows that by 1981 both Monsanto and the EPA were aware of malignant tumours and pre-cancerous conditions in the test animals which were fed small doses of glyphosate in the secret feeding experiments. Although concerns were expressed at the time by EPA committees, these concerns were later suppressed under the weight of conflicting evidence brought forward by Monsanto, some of it involving the inappropriate use of historical control data of dubious quality. None of these studies is available for independent examination (14). That is a scandal in itself. There has been a protracted and cynical cover-up in this matter (15). Glyphosate is a “probable human carcinogen”, as now confirmed by the WHO Working Group, and no matter what protestations may now come from Monsanto and the EPA, they have been fully aware of its potential to cause cancer for at least 35 years. If they had acted in a precautionary fashion back then, instead of turning a blind eye to scientific malpractice (16), glyphosate would never have been licensed, and thousands of lives might have been saved.”

Retired Academic Pathologist Dr Stanley Ewen says: “Glyphosate has been implicated in human carcinogenesis by IARC and it is remarkable that, as early as 1981, glyphosate was noted to be associated with pre neoplastic changes in experimental mice. This finding was never revealed by the regulatory process and one might therefore expect to see human malignancy increasing on the record in the ensuing years. John Little (personal communication) has demonstrated an unexpected and alarming 56% upsurge in malignancy in England in those under 65 in the past 10 years. Presumably British urinary excretion of glyphosate is similar to the documented urine levels in Germany, and therefore everyone is at risk. The effect of glyphosate on endocrine tissue such as breast and prostate, or even placenta, is disruptive at least and an increased incidence of endocrine neoplasia is likely to be seen in National Statistics. The Glyphosate Task Force denies the involvement of glyphosate in human malignancy despite their knowledge of many reports of lymphomas and pituitary adenomas in experimental animals dosed with glyphosate. On the other hand, Prof. Don Huber at a recent meeting in the Palace of Westminster, has warned of severe consequences if rampant glyphosate consumption is not reined in. I feel sure that the suppression of the experimental results of 1981 has enhanced the global risk of malignancy.”

Toxico-pathologist Professor Vyvyan Howard says: “”The drive towards transparency in the testing of pharmaceuticals is gathering pace with legislation in the EU, USA and Canada being developed. All trials for licensed drugs will likely have to become available in the public domain. In my opinion the case with agrochemicals should be no different. At least with pharmaceuticals exposure is voluntary and under informed consent. There are several biomonitoring studies which demonstrate that there is widespread exposure of human populations to glyphosate, presumably without informed consent. Given the clear level of mistrust over the licensing of this herbicide and the emerging epidemiological evidence of its negative effects there can, in my opinion, be no case whatsoever for keeping the toxicological studies, used to justify licencing, a secret. They should be put in the public domain.”

Research scientist Dr Anthony Samsel says: “Monsanto’s Trade Secret studies of glyphosate show significant incidence of cell tumors of the testes and tumorigenic growth in multiple organs and tissues. They also show significant interstitial fibrosis of the kidney including effects in particular to the Pituitary gland, mammary glands, liver, and skin. Glyphosate has significant effects to the lungs indicative of chronic respiratory disease. Glyphosate has an inverse dose response relationship, and it appears that its effects are highly pH dependent. Both Monsanto and the EPA knew of the deleterious effects of this chemical in 1980 at the conclusion of their multiple long-term assessments, but the EPA hid the results of their findings as “trade secrets.” Monsanto has been lying and covering up the truth about glyphosate’s harmful effects on public health and the environment for decades. The increases in multiple chronic diseases, seen since its introduction into the food supply, continue to rise in step with its use. Monsanto’s Roundup glyphosate based herbicides have a ubiquitous presence as residues in the food supply directly associated with its crop use. Nations must stand together against Monsanto and other chemical companies who continue to destroy the biosphere. We are all part of that biosphere and we are all connected. What affects one affects us all.”

NOTES

(1)  Carcinogenicity of tetrachlorvinphos, parathion, malathion, diazinon, and glyphosate (2015)
Kathryn Z Guyton, Dana Loomis, Yann Grosse, Fatiha El Ghissassi, Lamia Benbrahim-Tallaa, Neela Guha, Chiara Scoccianti, Heidi Mattock, Kurt Straif,  on behalf of the International Agency for Research on Cancer Monograph Working Group, IARC, Lyon, France
Lancet Oncol 2015.  Published Online March 20, 2015 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ S1470-2045(15)70134-8
International Agency for Research on Cancer 16 Volume 112: Some organophosphate insecticides and herbicides: tetrachlorvinphos, parathion, malathion, diazinon and glyphosate. IARC Working Group. Lyon; 3–10 March 2015. IARC Monogr Eval Carcinog Risk Chem Hum (in press).

(2)  Monsanto seeks retraction for report linking herbicide to cancer
By Carey Gillam, Reuters
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/24/us-monsanto-herbicide-idUSKBN0MK2GF20150324
The response by the pesticide industry association, the Glyphosate Task Force, is here:
http://www.wmcactionnews5.com/story/28574811/statement-of-the-gtf-on-the-recent-iarc-decision-concerning-glyphosate

(3)  Helmut Greim, David Saltmiras, Volker Mostert, and Christian Strupp (2015)  REVIEW ARTICLE:  Evaluation of carcinogenic potential of the herbicide glyphosate, drawing on tumor incidence data from fourteen chronic/carcinogenicity rodent studies. Crit Rev Toxicol, 2015; Early Online: 1–24  DOI: 10.3109/10408444.2014.1003423

(4)  Not only is this paper written by authors who have strong industry links, but the 14 carcinogenicity studies assessed are carefully selected industry studies which have not been peer-reviewed and published in mainstream scientific journals.  All of the studies were conducted for clients (like Monsanto) who would have experienced gigantic commercial repercussions if anything “inconvenient” had been reported upon, with glyphosate already in use across the world.  Therefore the possibility of fraud and data manipulation cannot be ruled out.  The 14 studies are all secret, and cannot be examined by independent toxicology experts.  The fact that the review article in question reproduces (as online supplementary material) a series of tables and data sets is immaterial, since the data are useless in the absence of clear explanations of the laboratory protocols and practices of the research teams involved.

(5)  http://www.monsanto.com/glyphosate/pages/is-glyphosate-safe.aspx

(6)  “A Three-Generation Reproduction Study in Rats with Glyphosate” (Final Report; Bio/dynamics Project No. 77-2063; March 31, 1981)  — submitted by Monsanto to EPA

(7)  “Addendum to Pathology Report for a Three-Generation Reproduction Study in Rats with Glyphosate.  R.D. #374; Special Report MSL-1724; July 6, 1982″ EPA Registration No 524-308, Action Code 401. Accession No 247793.  CASWELL#661A” — submitted by Monsanto to EPA

(8)  “A Lifetime Feeding Study Of Glyphosate In Rats”  (Report by GR Lankas and GK Hogan from Bio/dynamics for Monsanto.  Project #77-2062, 1981:  MRID 00093879) — submitted by Monsanto to EPA
and Addendum Report  #77-2063

(9)  Archived EPA memos from 1982 and 1986:
http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/chemicalsearch/chemical/foia/cleared-reviews/reviews/103601/103601-135.pdf
http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/chemicalsearch/chemical/foia/cleared-reviews/reviews/103601/103601-210.pdf
The 1991 EPA Memo is accessible via:
http://sustainablepulse.com/2015/03/26/who-glyphosate-report-ends-thirty-year-cancer-cover-up/#.VSVPZ2Z3bJk

(10)  Knezevich, AL and Hogan, GK (1983) “A Chronic Feeding study of Glyphosate (Roundup Technical) in Mice”.  Project No 77-2061. Bio/dynamics Inc for Monsanto.  Accession No #251007-251014  — document not available but cited in EPA 1986 Memo.
Follow-up study:  McConnel, R. “A chronic feeding study of glyphosate (Roundup technical) in mice: pathology report on additional kidney sections”. Unpublished project no. 77-2061A, 1985, submitted to EPA by BioDynamics, Inc.

(11)  Glyphosate was first registered for use by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) in 1974, and after various reviews reregistration was completed in 1993.
Glyphosate (CASRN 1071-83-6)
Classification — D (not classifiable as to human carcinogenicity)
Basis — Inadequate evidence for oncogenicity in animals. Glyphosate was originally classified as C, possible human carcinogen, on the basis of increased incidence of renal tumors in mice. Following independent review of the slides the classification was changed to D on the basis of a lack of statistical significance and uncertainty as to a treatment-related effect.
http://www.epa.gov/iris/subst/0057.htm
http://sustainablepulse.com/2015/03/26/who-glyphosate-report-ends-thirty-year-cancer-cover-up/
npic.orst.edu/factsheets/glyphotech.pdf

(12)  Monsanto Company. 1981a. MRID No. 0081674, 00105995. Available from EPA. Write to FOI, EPA, Washington, DC 20460.
Monsanto Company. 1981b. MRID No. 00093879. Available from EPA. Write to FOI, EPA, Washington, DC 20460.
Monsanto Company. 1985. MRID No. 00153374. Available from EPA. Write to FOI, EPA, Washington, DC 20460.
Monsanto Company. 1980a. MRID No. 00046362. Available from EPA. Write to FOI, EPA, Washington, DC 20460.
Monsanto Company. 1980b. MRID No. 00046363. Available from EPA. Write to FOI, EPA, Washington, DC 20460.

(13)  http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Scandal_of_Glyphosate_Reassessment_in_Europe.php
http://permaculturenews.org/2012/11/01/why-glyphosate-should-be-banned-a-review-of-its-hazards-to-health-and-the-environment/
Key studies showing toxic effects of glyphosate and Roundup.  Ch 4 in GMO Myths and Truths
http://earthopensource.org/earth-open-source-reports/gmo-myths-and-truths-2nd-edition/
Antoniou, M. et al. Teratogenic Effects of Glyphosate-Based Herbicides: Divergence of Regulatory Decisions from Scientific Evidence J Environ Anal Toxicol 2012, S:4
http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2161-0525.S4-006
http://www.earthopensource.org/files/pdfs/Roundup-and-birth-defects/RoundupandBirthDefectsv5.pdf

(14)  That having been said, Monsanto has allowed access to selected later reports to selected researchers (Greim et al, 2015).  It is still uncertain whether these selected reports are available in full, for detailed independent scrutiny — even though there can now be no possible justification for “trade secret” designation, following the lapse of the US glyphosate patent in 2000.

(15)  http://sustainablepulse.com/2015/03/26/who-glyphosate-report-ends-thirty-year-cancer-cover-up/
In 1985 the carcinogenic potential of glyphosate was first considered by an EPA panel, called the Toxicology Branch Ad Hoc Committee. The Committee then classified glyphosate as a Class C Carcinogen on the basis of its carcinogenic potential.  This classification was changed by the EPA in 1991 to a Class E category on the basis of “evidence of non-carcinogenicity for humans”.  Mysteriously this change in glyphosate’s classification occurred during the same period that Monsanto was developing its first Roundup-Ready (glyphosate-resistant) GM Crops.  Not for the first time, commercial considerations were allowed to trump public health concerns.
The EPA scale of cancer-forming potential of substances:
Group A: Carcinogenic to humans
Group B: Likely to be carcinogenic to humans
Group C: Suggestive evidence of carcinogenic potential
Group D: Inadequate information to assess carcinogenic potential
Group E: Not likely to be carcinogenic to humans

(16)  Wikipedia 2012:  Internal EPA Memos Document Fraud
1983 EPA Scientist on EPA’s public stance: “Our viewpoint is one of protecting the public health when we see suspicious data.” Unfortunately, EPA has not taken that conservative viewpoint in its assessment of glyphosate’s cancer causing potential.”
“There are no studies available to NCAP evaluating the carcinogenicity of Roundup or other glyphosate-containing products.  Without such tests, the carcinogenicity of glyphosate-containing products is unknown.”
“Tests done on glyphosate to meet registration requirements have been associated with fraudulent practices.”
“Countless deaths of rats & mice are not reported.”
“Data tables have been fabricated”
“There is a routine falsification of data”

Read featured article here: http://www.gmfreecymru.org/documents/monsanto_knew_of_glyphosate.html

TLB recommends you read more great/pertinent articles from GM-Free Cymru.

chemtrails haarp

By: Roger Landry (TLB)

Let us discuss catastrophe beyond anything except a full scale, all out, nuclear exchange … but just as deadly and final … And one that may have already been triggered to the ultimate detriment of all humanity!

There seems to be less and less normal, or naturally occurring, weather as we progress these days. All one need do is look up on any given day and see the absolute mess our once beautiful skies have become.

What we are witnessing is increasing ecological and biological damage so severe that alarm bells are sounding across the planet. From the constant raining down of heavy (toxic) metals to the massive release of methane from the warming ocean depths … humanity is now under constant, and what could soon be fatal attack.

The scariest part of all this is the experts who blatantly deny this is even happening. Even more dangerous are those who only tell half truths (half truths are by default … Lies). These learned individuals by their omissions do more damage, or present more danger to the truth than any corporate shill possibly could.

Please listen as I discuss this most dire topic in detail with one of the most active researchers, and concerned activists, known to TLB … Dane Wigington of GeoEngineering Watch. This is a discussion (recorded) you must hear if you truly love your children and wish them to inherit a viable planet … YES this is that dire !!!

Read more of this article here: Geo-engineering Humanity’s Demise: A TLB Special With Dane Wigington of GeoEngineering Watch

Click on image to hear radio show

TLB radio

HAARP, Chemtrails = Geo-engineering … Once knowledge is acquired … action is required. Knowing of evil being perpetrated against humanity, and doing nothing to stop it, makes you by default complicit in crimes against humanity. Please watch the video below, read the petition, and if you care anything about the future of mankind … sign and share it !!!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

WORLD WIDE petition :Ban CHEMTRAILS  and HAARP now!

Why this is important

OUR AIR IS A TOXIC PLASMA:

WE ASK FOR WORLD WIDE BAN OF CHEMTRAILS AND HAARP type WEAPONS ( non lethal weapons) ON ECO SPHERE AND POPULATIONS.

Is the U.S. Government bullying other nations into “GEO INGINEERING “otherwise known as chemtrail spraying? More than 190 nations agreed to ban geoengineering under a United Nations treaty to protect the diversity of life on Earth. The ban stipulated that “no climate-related geoengineering activities that may affect biodiversity take place, until there is an adequate scientific basis on which to justify such activities and appropriate consideration of the associated risks for the environment and biodiversity and associated social, economic and cultural impacts.” However: the United States was not one of the signatory countries. ‘a detailed analysis of the document that apparently was drafted by the U.S. in response to the ban concludes: “It looks like the U.S. is trying to think of a way to get the rest of the world on board with the geoengineering program – not to stop it.” The Belfort Group made of specialists in Aeronautics worked and made a file ‘ Case Orange ” which is available to prove that chemtrails do exist and are quite different from normal contrails. See also the documentary ‘ What in the world are they spraying ‘ by Paul Wittenberger and Michael Murphy”

Mais que sont les chemtrails en realite? car ils ne sont pas loin s’en faut de la geo ingineurie climatique visant a nous proteger d’un ‘global warming de cause CO2 d’ oringine humaine ( these de Al Gore prouvee fausse )

par contre une chose sure et certaine qui pollue, detruit notre atmosphere et notre AIR, nos ECOSYSTEMES et RECHAUFFE la temperature de ‘latmosphere creant en plus des desastres climatiques, ce sont justement ces programmes de CHEMTRAILS mixes a des ONDES SCALAIRES ( de type HAARP )

Composition des CHEMTRAILS: certifies par experts y compris militaires: nano particules de aluminium, baryum, strontium, bacteries, radioactive materiaux, fibres , polymeres, et autres composants toxiques, Plasma satmospherique toxique, selon Tom Bosco and Clifford Carnicom qui ont etudie le phenomene depuis deux decades.

les consequences pour les ecosystemes tout entiers et la sante humaine sont desastreuses: sterilisation des Sols ,( laissant la place a Monsanto ), pollution des Eaux, de L’Air, des Sols, plus sur les humains: ( respiratoires , cerveau, cognitivite, systeme immunitaire, etc.. ) Le Morgellons desease est exponentiel et est relie aux epandages.( Carnicom.org )

Ces programmes sont caches au public alors que des millions de gens a present le voient et s’indignent de par le monde et en subisssent les consequences desastreuses au point de vue sante et environnemental.la soit disant “geoingieneurie atmospherique” , qui de plus est une excuse et un men songe, est cachee au grand public et sera apparemment revelee peu a peu,dans les medias, en arguant nous proteger du “Global warming “alors que deja d’autres scientifiques le remettent en question,.

les CHEMTRAILS ne sont PAS de la Geo Ingieneurie climatiquen ert augmentent au contraire le rechauffemend de ‘lAtmosphere et detraquent completement la meteo et le climat.

: les aerosols CHEMTRAILS

conjugues aux ondes saclaires ( HAARP type ) :

ont des consequences desastreuses en terme d’assechement de l’atmosphere, de rechauffement de l’atmosphere, de secheresses d’un cote , de pluies diluviennes de l’autre de changements de tempetures aberrants, d’effets sur le jet stream, et le Methane en Arctique, sur la couche d’ OZONE et de propagation anormale et extremement dangeureuse de particules de sels metalliques sous forme nano technologique et d’ondes scalaires en face desquels aucun organisme vivant ne peut se proteger.

MOTIFS :

NEW BOOK:

“Chemtrails, HAARP, and the Full Spectrum Dominance of Planet Earth”

EXTRAIT :

“How chemtrails and ionospheric heaters like the High-frequency Active Auroral Research Project (HAARP) in Alaska services a full-spectrum dominance. This “Revolution in Military Affairs” needs an atmospheric medium to assure wireless access to the bodies and brains of anyone on Earth–from heat-seeking missiles to a form of mind control.

How sinister are these technologies? Are we being prepared for a “global village” lockdown? The recent release of NSA records have reminded Americans that “eyes in the sky” are tracking us as supercomputers record the phone calls, e-mails, internet oats, and even the brain frequencies of millions.

Elana M. Freeland’s startling book sifts through the confusion surrounding chemtrails-versus-contrails and how extreme weather is being “geo-engineered” to enrich disaster capitalists and intimidate nations.

A deconstruction of Bernard J. Eastlund’s HAARP patent points to other covert agendas, such as a global Smart Grid infrastructure that enables access to every body and brain on Earth, a “Transhumanist” future that erases lines between human and machine, and Nanobiological hybrids armed with microprocessers that infest and harm human bodies.

Related Article and Interview

BAN OF CHEMTRAILS AND SCALAR WAVES ON POPULATIONS AND LAND.

ILLEGAL AND CRIMINAL SPRAYING AND USE OF NON LETHAL WEAPONS : STOP !!!

STOP THE ECOCIDE !!

Signed by: CITIZENS OF THE WORLD.

###################

TLB Recommends you visit this link and sign this petition, for your sake and that of our children: https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/Clean_Air_for_the_world_Ban_Chemtrails_from_our_skies_now/?pv=56&rc=tagging&fb_action_ids=818648574857113&fb_action_types=avaaz-org%3Asign

 

linka_neonicotinoids-466

by Christina Sarich

Lowe’s and Home Depot were recently targeted in a campaign by activists urging the stores to stop selling neonicotinoid pesticides, a likely culprit in the decimation of bee and butterfly colonies. It looks as if at least one of the mega retailers listened. Lowe’s, one of the US’s largest home improvement and gardening supply stores, has plans to stop selling products containing ‘neonics,’ largely in response to activist pressure.

It is likely that the store is following the lead of other retailers who stopped selling neonics earlier this year.

Ironically, many plants being sold as “bee friendly” (i.e. some plants are attractive to pollinators and also repel pests that can devour a garden) at these retailers were pre-treated with neonics at levels even higher than those used on large farms. There are no labels on these plants indicating that they are pre-treated with neonics.

This particular group of insecticides is so dangerous that the entire state of Minnesota considered a complete ban, and the EU suspended their use in all 27 countries years ago. In the  US, the city of Eugene, Oregon is the first city to have banned neonicotinoid insecticides.

linka_neonicotinoids-466

Image from: www.tonylinka.com/scientific/neonicotinoids.html

Neonics are particularly worrisome as they are absorbed by the plant and transferred into its vascular system, making the plant itself (not just the insecticide) toxic to insects, including bees and butterflies.

“The impact of this class of insecticides on pollinating insects such as honey bees and native bees is a cause for concern. Because they are absorbed into the plant, neonicotinoids can be present in pollen and nectar, making these floral resources toxic to pollinators that feed on them. The long-lasting presence of neonicotinoids in plants makes it possible for these chemicals to harm pollinators even when the initial application is made outside of the bloom period. In addition, neonicotinoids persist in the soil and in plants for very long periods of time.”

Bees have been dying by the millions in what is called colony collapse disorder with much evidence pointing to neonicotinoids and other pesticides and herbicides as the most likely culprits.

Hopefully, Lowe’s will be the first of many more farm and gardening supply companies that will remove neonics from their shelves, in order to save the bees. Without them our food supply is in jeopardy.

Lowe’s plans to phase out neonics by 2019. Let’s hope it won’t be too late by then.

Additional Sources:

TonyLinka.

 

ChristinaSarichAbout Christina Sarich:
Christina Sarich is a humanitarian and freelance writer helping you to Wake up Your Sleepy Little Head, and See the Big Picture. Her blog is Yoga for the New World. Her latest book is Pharma Sutra: Healing the Body And Mind Through the Art of Yoga.

Read article here: http://naturalsociety.com/activist-power-lowes-to-stop-selling-bee-killing-neonics/

TLB recommends you visit Natural Society for more great articles and pertinent information.




  • Subscribe to Blog via Email

    Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.