The Liberty Beacon

The Liberty Beacon



Prince charles1-460


by Zen Gardner

To really understand the true context of this climate change charade one must factor in the massive worldwide geoengineering program. Unbeknownst to many, prior to the escalation of the war on Syria, millions of Syrians farmers were driven to poverty and forced into city centers for work via engineered drought.
It’s all part of clearing the land of what the controllers consider the nuisance humanity. It’s happening in many parts of the world, including the infamous California drought. Agenda 21, further augmented by Agenda 2030, lays this plan out clearly, herding people into densely populated areas for easier monitoring and control, amongst other sinister intentions. The unusable land will once again be watered by geoengineers once it’s in the guardianship of the state and/or huge corporations as they have done before in Australia and other countries.
Engineered torrential floods, freezes and storms are all part of their arsenal, but the drought factor needs highlighting as it’s hitting the world’s food supply as well as demographics very hard. For an in-depth look at this weapon of choice see Engineering The Climate To Control Populations. Be sure to click on the links to the various examples to see the enormous range of this ongoing drought program.
So here’s the pathetic, twisted mainstream narrative so many are buying into, conveniently broadcast just preceding the farcical UN Climate Summit:

Climate change has ‘huge impact’ on Syrian conflict – Prince Charles

Failure to properly address climate change issues has played a role in the rise of terrorism and instability in Syria, Prince Charles has said in an interview.

Speaking to Sky News in an interview to air Monday, the heir to the British throne claimed climate change “has a huge impact on what is happening.”

“There’s very good evidence indeed that one of the major reasons for this horror in Syria, funnily enough, was a drought that lasted for about five or six years, which meant that huge numbers of people in the end had to leave the land,” he said.

Prince Charles told the broadcaster: “We’re seeing a classic case of not dealing with the problem…it sounds awful to say, but some of us were saying 20 something years ago that if we didn’t tackle these issues, you would see ever greater conflict over scarce resources and ever greater difficulties over drought, and the accumulating effect of climate change, which means that people have to move.”

Prince Charles’ comments echo the findings of a report published in March in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, which highlighted the effect of a 2007-2010 drought on the conflict in Syria.

Asked if Britain can afford to address climate change in a time of budget cuts and austerity, the 67-year-old prince said: “The trouble is if we don’t, this is the awful thing, if we don’t it’s going to get so much worse, then life will become very, very complicated indeed, and what we’re experiencing now will be as nothing to the problems.”

The interview, which was recorded prior to the deadly Paris massacre, comes ahead of a major UN climate change summit in Paris next week, where more than 100 heads of state will try to secure an agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Charles is expected to deliver a keynote speech at the conference. MORE>>

Of course he’ll be speaking there, as will the usual high profile talking heads. “Luckily” no protests will be had due to the Par-ISIS stage production.

They really do try to think of everything. Too bad their world will crumble around their ears.

Stay free.

Love, Zen

Read featured article here.

TLB recommends you read more great articles from Zen Gardner

 Toxic pesticide banned on genetically engineered crops 

By: Anna Lappe

Washington D.C.  — The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), responding to litigation, has announced it is revoking the registration of “Enlist Duo.”  Approved by the agency just over a year ago, Enlist Duo is a toxic combination of glyphosate and 2,4-D that Dow AgroSciences created for use on the next generation of genetically engineered crops, designed to withstand being drenched with this potent herbicide cocktail.  In its court filing, EPA stated it is taking this action after realizing that the combination of these chemicals is likely significantly more harmful than it had initially believed.

This action resolves a year-long legal challenge filed by a coalition of conservation groups seeking to rescind the approval of the dangerous herbicide blend. EPA had approved use of Enlist Duo in Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Ohio, South Dakota, Wisconsin, Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, Mississippi, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and North Dakota, and had intended to approve it in additional areas in the near future.

Earthjustice and Center for Food Safety, on behalf of Center for Food Safety, Beyond Pesticides, Center for Biological Diversity, Environmental Working Group, the National Family Farm Coalition, and Pesticide Action Network North America, had challenged EPA’s failure to consider the impacts of Enlist Duo on threatened and endangered plants and animals protected under the Endangered Species Act. The Act requires that every federal agency consider the impacts of its actions on our nation’s most imperiled plants and animals and seek input from the expert wildlife agencies before plunging ahead, which EPA had refused to do.

“The decision by EPA to withdraw the illegally approved Enlist Duo crops is a huge victory for the environment and the future of our food,” said George Kimbrell, Center for Food Safety’s senior attorney. “We will remain vigilant to ensure industry does not pressure the agency into making the same mistake in the future.”

“With this action, EPA confirms the toxic nature of this lethal cocktail of chemicals, and has stepped back from the brink,” said Earthjustice Managing Attorney Paul Achitoff.  “Glyphosate is a probable carcinogen and is wiping out the monarch butterfly, 2,4-D also causes serious human health effects, and the combination also threatens endangered wildlife.  This must not, and will not, be how we grow our food.”

Dow created Enlist crops as a quick fix for the problem created by “Roundup Ready” crops, the previous generation of genetically engineered crops designed to resist the effects of glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide.  Just as overuse of antibiotics has left resistant strains of bacteria to thrive, repeated use of Roundup on those crops allowed glyphosate-resistant “superweeds” to proliferate, and those weeds now infest tens of millions of acres of U.S. farmland.  Enlist crops allow farmers to spray both glyphosate and 2,4-D without killing their crops, which they hope will kill weeds resistant to glyphosate alone.  But some weeds have already developed 2,4-D resistance, and the escalating cycle of more toxic pesticides in the environment will continue unless EPA stops approving these chemicals, and USDA stops rubber-stamping new genetically engineered crops.

“This Thanksgiving, I am thankful for EPA taking this important action to protect people, rare plants, and animals from Enlist Duo,” said Lori Ann Burd, Environmental Health director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “As we gather with our families for the holiday feast, we can all breathe a little bit easier knowing that EPA has protected our food from being drenched with this poisonous pesticide cocktail.” 

Judy Hatcher, executive director of Pesticide Action Network, commented: “EPA is taking a step in the right direction, but Enlist Duo shouldn’t have been given the green light in the first place. Too often, GE seeds and the herbicides designed to accompany them are rushed to market without thorough evaluation of their real-world impacts on community health and farmer livelihoods.”


“The Center for Food Safety is the leading legal and consumer advocacy group in this country working to protect our food…the future of the food movement depends on groups like the Center”
Anna Lappe is an award-winning author, founding principal of the Small Planet Institute and the Real Food Media Project.


TLB highly recommends you visit CENTER FOR FOOD SAFETY for more pertinent articles and information.

See featured article here

The Liberty Beacon contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.


By TLB Contributor: Dane Wigington

There are members of society that are so totally despicable that words cannot fully describe them. The criminal behavior of countless agencies and organizations is a reflection of the epidemic moral depravity that runs through their ranks. So many have long since sold their honor for a paycheck and a pension. Our will and our morality is all that any of us truly owns, the rest can be taken. If these sacred values are sold or sacrificed, there is nothing left to stand on as the gathering storm gains momentum. Those who have sold out are willing to do or say anything, including the attempt to completely poison the perspectives of our children for a profit.


A little girl takes a photo of the toxic skies above Lhasa, Tibet. Source:

We who are awake and aware must make every effort to expose the people and agencies that are engaging in the mental corruption and conditioning of our children. In the short 5 minute video below, deplorable material from Common Core and NASA is addressed, and the documents in question are shown.

Inexcusable transgressions like those just outlined in the video cannot be overlooked. The public email contacts of responsible parties should be posted and displayed everywhere possible. Such people must be placed on notice that we, the populations of the world, are NOT OK with their behavior. They should also be put on notice that at some point in the near future the public will likely hold them legally and morally accountable as accomplices in the climate engineering assault by helping to cover the tracks of the perpetrators.

In the meantime, protecting and properly educating our children is up to us.

Do we inform them about what is occurring above their heads? Yes.

Do we make clear to them that we are fighting for their future? Yes.

Do we do everything in our power to provide them hope and the chance to be a child without an excessive burden? Yes.

My own children’s voices are in a video addressing the ongoing climate engineering insanity.

See more here

They have hope for a future because they know we are fully committed to them. Our children need to know that our lives belong to them. We must all work together toward sounding the alarm, there is not a day to spare.


TLB recommends you visit GeoEngineering Watch for more pertinent articles and information.

See featured article here


The Liberty Beacon contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.


By: F. William Engdahl | New Eastern Outlook –

For the better part of the past century Western pop culture has systematically denigrated and devalued what should be the most honored profession of all. Those who labor with the land, day-in and day-out, to deliver the food that we eat have assumed a social status too often similar to the dirt of the soil they till. No one stops to ask a simple question: What do we do when we have killed off all our farmers?

Some of the more naïve city-dwellers would retort with little reflection, “But we have industrialized food production; we don’t need manual farm labor today.”

Indeed, the numbers are impressive.

Let’s take my homeland, the United States of America. In 1950, a time of general prosperity and strong economic growth, the total US population was 151,132,000 and the farm population was 25,058,000 making farmers just over 12% of the total labor force. There were 5,388,000 farms with an average size of about 87 hectares. Forty years later, in 1990, the year the Soviet Union collapsed and the Cold War ended, the USA had a total population of 261,423,000 of which the farm population numbered just under three million, 2,987,552, making farmers a mere 2.6% of the total labor force. The number of farms had shrunk to only 2,143,150, a loss of 60%, but because of industrial concentration, average size was 187 hectares.

Rockefeller’s Agribusiness Revolution

What we are told, those of us whose relation to meat, dairy, fruits and vegetables ends at the supermarket, is that this is a great progress, the liberation of almost 23 million farm workers to get city jobs and live a better life.

It isn’t that simple.

We are not told the true effects on food quality that has been created by the mechanization and industrialization of food production in America since the Harvard Business School, on a grant from the Rockefeller Foundation, began what they termed “agribusiness,” the conversion of our food supply into a pure for-profit vertically integrated business modelled on the Rockefeller oil cartel.

The raising of hogs, dairy cows, beef cattle, chicken all became industrialized gradually after the 1950’s in the USA. The baby chicks were confined to spaces so tiny they could barely stand. To make them get fat faster, the owners would pump them full of antibiotics and feed them a diet of GMO corn and soya meal. According to the Natural Resources Defense Council, 80 percent of all antibiotics sold in the United States are for use on livestock and poultry, not humans. The majority are given to animals mixed in their food or water to speed growth. After all, time is money.

The traditional family farmer, of the sort my late grandfather was in North Dakota prior to the First World War, was driven largely from the land by USDA Government policy, policy that favored industrialization regardless of the quality of food nutrient that resulted. Tractors became computerized, mammoth machines driven by GPS. One such tractor could work remotely and do the work of many farmers of old.

The result was financially fabulous….for the industry owners—ADM, Cargill, Monsanto, for the packagers like Kraft Foods, Kelloggs, Nestle, Unilever, Toepfer, Maggi. The American Rockefeller-Harvard “agribusiness” business model was globalized, beginning with the GATT negotiations of the Uruguay Round of trade liberalization in the late 1980s where the EU dropped much of its traditional protection of domestic farmers in favor of free trade in agriculture products.

During the late 1980’s as the Uruguay Round of GATT trade negotiations was about to give US agribusiness giants what they wanted—freedom to rape the EU and other protected agriculture markets with their highly efficient products, to destroy millions of EU farmers who had farmed with a passion for generations, I went to Brussels to make a background interview as a journalist with a high-level EU Commission bureaucrat responsible for agriculture. He was an apparently well-educated, multi-lingual bureaucrat, Danish-born as he noted. He argued in defense of free trade by declaring, “Why should I pay taxes from Denmark so that Bavarian farmers on their tiny plots of land can remain in business?”

The answer, which I kept to myself then, was simply because the traditional family farmer is uniquely suited to mediate with nature and us to produce food that is healthy for humans and animals to eat. No machine can replace the personal dedication or passion that I have seen again and again in every farmer I have met who truly cares about his livestock or crops.

Now the very same very rich and very loveless people, I call them the American Oligarchs, are systematically doing everything to destroy the human food quality. Clearly in my view, they are doing so with a goal of mass population reduction. There is no other reason the Rockefeller Foundation would spend hundreds of millions of (tax exempt) dollars to create GMO techniques, to support Monsanto and other chemical giants like DuPont, clearly knowing they are slowly poisoning the population to an early death.

Depressing pesticides

This has been demonstrated in independent tests regarding the toxic effects on animals and even human cells in an embryo. Now, independent even of GMO crops, new tests show that ordinary pesticide chemicals sprayed by farm workers or farmers on crops cause neurological damage—depression, Parkinsons’ and even suicide—to the farmers or farm workers using the deadly chemicals.

The US National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences in their landmark Agricultural Health Study studied a group of 89,000 farmers and other pesticide applicators in Iowa and North Carolina. The mammoth study concluded that, “use of two pesticide classes, fumigants and organochlorine insecticides, and seven individual pesticides—the fumigants aluminum phosphide and ethylene dibromide; the phenoxy herbicide (2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy)acetic acid (2,4,5-T); the organochlorine insecticide dieldrin; and the organophosphate insecticides diazinon, malathion, and parathion—were all positively associated with depression in each case group.”

The study showed that farmers with the highest number of lifetime exposure days to pesticides were 50 percent more likely to later have a depression diagnosis.

The research linked long-term use of pesticides to higher rates of depression and suicide. Evidence also suggests that pesticide poisoning – a heavy dose in a short amount of time – doubles the risk of depression.

After suppressing the effects among farm families for years about the resulting depression and related neurological symptoms, farmers and their families have begun speaking out. Lorann Stallones, an epidemiologist and psychology professor at Colorado State University says, “There’s been a shift – partly because there’s more people talking about being mentally incapacitated.”

Epidemiologist Freya Kamel and her colleagues reported that among 19,000 studied, “those who used two classes of pesticides and seven individual pesticides were more likely to have been diagnosed with depression. Those who used organochlorine insecticides were up to 90 percent more likely to have been diagnosed with depression than those who hadn’t used them. For fumigants, the increased risk was up to 80 percent.

In France, farmers who used herbicides were nearly twice as likely to have been treated for depression as those who didn’t use herbicides, according to a study published in 2013. The study of 567 French farmers found that the risk was even greater when the herbicide applicators had been doing it for more than 19 years.

In short, we are destroying the nutritional value of the food we eat and slowly destroying the remaining farmers responsible for cultivating that. It is a recipe for the ultimate extinction of life on the planet as we know it. No, that is not an exaggeration.

I firmly believe that honest, nature-conscious organic farmers ought to receive significant tax breaks to encourage other farmers to leave the grotesque agribusiness model behind and return to growing or raising honest food again as they did only a few short decades ago. And severely high taxation ought to be imposed on farmers who use proven toxic chemicals like Roundup by Monsanto or the neonicotinoids like Bayer AG’s Confidor, Gaucho or Advocate, or Poncho, or Syngenta’s Actara, Platinum or Cruiser to name just the most sold.

Right now our regulators in the EU and USA do everything to discourage that, something actually quite stupid, unless, of course, some loveless, power-addicted oligarchs sitting atop their mountain, looking contemptuously down on us normal folk, have decided that’s just what they desire. If so, it’s up to us to stop looking up to those on the mountain and look at what we ourselves have accepted as normal, that is slowly killing us and the farmers who feed us. Maybe the time has come to change that unhealthy situation.

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

First appeared:


Read featured article here

TLB recommends you read more great/pertinent articles from The SleuthJournal.

The Liberty Beacon contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.


Article image credit: Paul Darrow for The New York Times

by Christina Sarich

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration just approved the sale of genetically modified salmon – the first GM animal allowed on the market.

The FDA says that AquaBounty’s product will not require special labeling because it is nutritionally equivalent to conventional farm-raised Atlantic salmon, though this has not been proven.

It should be no surprise that the parent company of AquaBounty, Intrexon Corp, saw stock shares rise by 7.3% to $37.55 in afternoon trading. Unless we fire everyone in the FDA immediately, and ban all salmon, the company has essentially blackmailed us all into eating GM fish.

This recent approval is an especially-big deal when we consider the possibility that the Deny Americans the Right to Know (DARK) Act could soon go through Congress and strip GMO labeling from all foods completely.

Imagine going through the grocery store and having no idea whether the food you’re buying has been genetically modified. This, despite poll after poll showing that Americans want GMO labeling.

Read: Canada Sued Over Genetically Modified Salmon Calamity

Now that we have proof that industrial agriculture will stop at nothing to force-feed the world chemicals and seed that could ruin human health and the environment, it becomes even more transparent that the FDA is doing the dirty business of regulating a genetically modified world.

GM soy, sugar beets, canola, cotton, and maize have already taken over the millions of acres of arable land, but now we will be forced to eat GM salmon, and it won’t be labeled. So you won’t even know if the fish you are dining on was caught in the ocean, or grown on a GM farm, or a combination of the two, since genetically modified salmon has been gene-edited to grow four times faster than regular salmon, and will be grown without proper measures to keep it from contaminating non-GM salmon through cross-breeding.

Only Alaska requires a label for GM salmon at present, so as GM salmon is shipped to your state, and served up in restaurants, sold in grocery stores, and even grown in local fisheries, you’ll have no way to avoid it  – unless of course, you just stop eating salmon.

About Christina Sarich:



Read featured article here

TLB recommends you read more great/pertinent articles from Natural Society.

The Liberty Beacon contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.



Written by 

“Livestock died from cold in their barns, chicken’s combs froze and fell off, trees exploded and travellers froze to death on the roads,” William Derham, a contributor to the Royal Society Philosophical Transactions, wrote in 1709. “Fish froze in the rivers, game lay down in the fields and died, and small birds perished by the million. The loss of tender herbs and exotic fruit trees was no surprise, but even hardy native oaks and ash trees succumbed.”

As the United Nations Climate Change Conference (November 30-December 11) in Paris approaches, the global warming alarm choir continues to pour on the heated rhetoric about the supposed “existential threat” posed by anthropogenic (manmade) global warming, or AGW.

In addition to the fact that, despite all the hyperventilating and handwringing by the alarmists there has been no measurable global warming for nearly 19 years, the historical record indicates that it is periods of global cooling, not warming, that have been most disastrous for our planet. In a new guest essay on the climate website WattsUpWithThat, Canadian environmental scientist Dr. Tim Ball provides some much-needed perspective on the climate changes of the past, particularly focusing on the extremely harsh cold spell at the start of the 18th century. Entitled, “1709: The Disparate Economic And Political Impact of Weather And Climate”, Dr. Ball’s investigation makes effective use of diaries and scientific reports from the era to provide a stark picture of the unforgiving nature of the hardships during the period known as the Little Ice Age (LIA). The LIA, a period that stretched roughly from the 14th century to the mid-19th century, followed the Medieval Warm Period (MWP, also known as the Medieval Climate Optimum), which ran from around AD 950-1300.

British scientist William Derham, quoted above, wrote:

People across Europe awoke on 6 January 1709 to find the temperature had plummeted. A three-week freeze was followed by a brief thaw — and then the mercury plunged again and stayed there. From Scandinavia in the north to Italy in the south, and from Russia in the east to the west coast of France, everything turned to ice. The sea froze. Lakes and rivers froze, and the soil froze to a depth of a metre or more. Livestock died from cold in their barns, chicken’s combs froze and fell off, trees exploded and travellers froze to death on the roads. It was the coldest winter in 500 years.

“Estimates place related deaths in France, mostly due to famine, to 600,000 by the end of 1710,” writes Dr. Ball. Of course, it was the poor who suffered the effects of the cold most severely. But even the wealthier classes were not exempt. Ball quotes a diary entry of Francoise-Marie de Bourbon, Duchess of Orleans, who wrote of the bitter cold: “I am sitting by a roaring fire, have a screen before the door, which is closed, so that I can sit here with a sable fur piece around my neck and my feet in a bearskin sack and I am still shivering with cold and can barely hold the pen. Never in my life have I seen a winter such as this one.”

An observer in Burgundy wrote: “Travelers died in the countryside, livestock in the stables, wild animals in the woods; nearly all the birds died, wine froze in barrels and public fires were lit to warm the poor.”

IPCC “Hockey Stick” Disappears MWP and LIA

“The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2001 Report claimed that neither the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) nor the Little Ice Age (LIA) occurred,” Dr. Ball writes. “They created the ‘hockey stick’ graph to prove their point.”

A striking visual image was needed to sell the idea of a dramatic, upward trend in global temperatures in the 20th century. So, the infamous hockey stick graph (popularized by Al Gore) simply erased the inconvenient truth of the MWP and LIA, two of the most well established epochs in the climactic record. And voilà! The necessary image “proving” AGW was born. Among the problems for the hockey stick fabricators, however, is a nemesis of their own making. Professor Ball reproduces a graph from the IPCC’s own 1990 Report which shows the MWP and LIA, contradicting its later hockey stick temperature “reconstruction.”

“If you are 80 years old, you have lived through four climate changes,” Dr. Ball notes,” pointing to “the warming from 1900 to 1940, the cooling from 1940 to 1980, the warming from 1980 to 2000 and the slight cooling from 2000 to the present.” “There are individual years within each period that had a significant impact,” Ball points out: “The summer of 1934, the winter of 1936, the winter of 1947 and so on.”

Dr. Ball’s essay adds to the considerable literature pointing toward cold periods as being far more dangerous and deadly than warm periods. An extensive study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States (PNAS) in 2011 found that times of war and conflict are more readily associated with periods of global cooling, not warming. The authors of the PNAS study wrote: “Results show that cooling from A.D. 1560–1660 caused successive agro-ecological, socioeconomic, and demographic catastrophes, leading to the General Crisis of the Seventeenth Century.” In addition, the PNAS report noted: “Cooling during the Cold Phase (1560-1660 AD) reduced crop yields by shortening the growing season and shrinking the cultivated land area…. Inflating grain prices led to hardships for many, and triggered social problems and conflicts such as rebellions, revolutions, and political reforms. Many of these disturbances led to armed conflicts, and the number of wars increased 41 percent during the Cold Phase.”

“Famine became more frequent too,” the PNAS authors further reported. “Nutrition deteriorated, and the average height of Europeans shrunk 2cm by the late 16th century. As temperatures began to rise again after 1650, so did the average height.”

“In the 18th century, the mild climate improved matters considerably, leading to the speedy recovery of both Europe’s economy and population,” the PNAS study notes.


Related articles:

Hundreds Die in Cold Waves — Media Keep Flogging Global Warming

Heat or Cold: Which Is More Deadly?

Forget Global Warming; COLD Kills

Just Freeze! EPA Says Burning Wood Is Bad, but So Is Natural Gas, Coal, Oil

Wood-burning Stoves Banned in New Homes in San Francisco Area

North Carolina Senate Passed Bill Nullifying EPA Regulations on Wood-burning Stoves





See featured article at:

TLB recommends that you rear other pertinent articles at:



The Liberty Beacon contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

Is Wi-Fi Killing Trees

By Carolanne Wright

Contributing Writer for Wake Up World

The health-damaging effects of wireless technology has been a hotly debated topic in scientific circles for years now. Linked with increased stress, brain fog, insomnia, cancer, lower sperm count, Alzheimer’s Disease, behavioral issues and developmental delays, many are questioning the daily use of Wi-Fi, cellphones, tablets, smart meters and other modern ‘necessities.’

For anyone who has first hand experience with electromagnetic sensitivity triggered by these devices, there is little doubt of their negative effect on health, mental clarity and overall well-being. Regrettably, humans aren’t the only ones negatively affected by wireless technology. Researchers in the Netherlands have found electromagnetic pollution can also harm trees.

Silent Damage

When officials in the Dutch city of Alphen aan den Rijn noticed malformations in local trees, they began to question the cause. After viral and bacterial infections were ruled out, researchers turned their attention to studying the effects of radio magnetic radiation on plant life.

According to a study by Wageningen University in the Netherlands, Wi-Fi signals could very well be responsible for the diseased trees, which exhibited bark tears, bleeding and leaves prematurely dying.

The team set out to test their hypothesis by exposing 20 ash trees to varying types of radiation over a period of three months. Trees with closest proximity to Wi-Fi networks suffered from telltale indicators of radiation sickness, including a “lead-like shine” on their leaves, which is caused by the deterioration of outer-cell layers — leading to premature death of the foliage.

The Los Angeles Times reports, “About 70% of all trees in the Netherlands’ urban areas show the same symptoms, compared with only 10% five years ago, the study found.”

The findings aren’t surprising, considering the explosion of Wi-Fi availability and use over the last few years.

The researchers stressed that these tree abnormalities aren’t isolated to the Netherlands — it’s an issue throughout the Western world. And trees in rural or non-urban locations don’t appear to suffer from the same unhealthy fate as their city-dwelling brethren.

After the study was widely circulated by media outlets, enormous backlash prompted the Dutch Antennae Agency to issue the following statement:

“The researcher from Wageningen University indicates that these are initial results and that has not been confirmed in a repeat survey. He warns strongly that there is still no far-reaching conclusions from its results. Based on the information now available, it cannot be concluded that the Wi-Fi radio signals leads to damage to trees or other plants.”

It should be noted the Dutch Antenna Agency “… is a department of Radio communications Agency Netherlands. This is a specialized agency of the Ministry of Economic Affairs. It has three main tasks: obtain, allocate and protect frequency space.” [Source]

Regardless of the agency’s motivation, it’s not easy to brush aside the findings of the study, especially since other researches have also found Wi-Fi signals harm plant life.

Is Wi-Fi Killing Trees - What Our Cities Would Look Like if Wi-Fi Was Visible
Composed by artist Nickolay Lamm, this is what our cities would look like if WiFi and Cell phone signals were was visible to the human eye.

Wi-Fi and Nature — An Unhealthy Mix

Katie Singer is involved with public policy at the Electromagnetic Radiation Policy Institute, an organization dedicated to fostering a better understanding of the environmental and human biological effects of exposure to electromagnetic radiation, as well as extremely low frequencies (ELF) found in power line supplies.

Singer is especially concerned about the effect radio frequency has on our natural environment. She writes in An Electronic Silent Spring:

“In a 2010 paper published in the International Journal of Forestry Research, researcher Katie Haggerty explained that the Earth’s natural radio frequency environment has remained about the same within the lifespan of modern trees. “Before 1800,” Haggerty wrote, “the major components of this environment were broadband radio noise from space (galactic noise), from lightning (atmospheric noise), and a smaller RF component from the sun. …Plants may have evolved” to use these environmental signals, along with visible light in order to regulate their periodic functions. Therefore, they may be sensitive to man-made RF fields. “The background of RF pollution,” Haggerty continued, “is now many times stronger than the naturally occurring RF environment. From the perspective of evolutionary time, the change can be considered sudden and dramatic. …Growth rates of plants and fungi can be increased or decreased by RF exposure. Exposure to RF signals can induce plants to produce more meristems, affect root cell structure, and induce stress response…causing biochemical changes.

Ms. Haggerty went on to describe her study of the influence of RF signals on trembling aspen seedlings. Seedlings that were shielded in a Faraday cage (a metal container that prevents RF radiation from entering) thrived. Seedlings that were exposed to RF signals showed necrotic lesions and abnormal coloring in their leaves.”

Moreover, Singer points out that British biologist Dr. Andrew Goldsworthy is alarmed by the increase in mysterious tree deaths occurring throughout urban areas across Europe. “They also show abnormal photoperiodic responses. Many have cancer-like growths under the bark (phloem nodules). The bark may also split so that the underlying tissues become infected. All of these can be explained as a result of exposure to weak RF fields from mobile phones, their base stations, Wi-Fi and similar sources of weak non-ionizing radiation, he said. [Source]

If trees are adversely effected by electromagnetic pollution, we need to seriously question how humans and animals can be negatively impacted as well.

If you would like to learn more about the dark underbelly of wireless technology — and what to do about it — visit BioInitiative 2012 and Dr. Mercola.

Article sources:

Previous articles by Carolanne Wright:

About the author:

Carolanne WrightCarolanne enthusiastically believes if we want to see change in the world, we need to be the change. As a nutritionist, natural foods chef and wellness coach, Carolanne has encouraged others to embrace a healthy lifestyle of organic living, gratefulness and joyful orientation for over 13 years

Through her website she looks forward to connecting with other like-minded people from around the world who share a similar vision. Follow Carolanne on Facebook, Twitter and Pinterest.


Read featured article here

TLB recommends you read more great/pertinent articles from Wake Up World.

The Liberty Beacon contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.


COP 21 (the 2015 Paris Climate Change Conference) aims to make legally binding climate change laws worldwide – a giant step towards One World Government.


COP 21 or the 2015 Paris Climate Conference

that is scheduled to take place in Paris on November 30, 2015, will be unlike other UN climate summits or climate conferences in the past. COP 21 has a scarily grandiose objective: in their own words to achieve a legally binding and universal agreement on climate … for the first time in over 20 years of UN negotiations. If they achieve their aim, we would be faced with the horrifying prospect that the mythology of AGW (anthropogenic global warming or manmade global warming) would become entrenched in law, thus solidifying it as fact in the minds of many. It would be a giant step towards Global Governance or a One World Government with a worldwide carbon tax, for so long now the wet dream of the New World Order manipulators.

COP 21: Trying to Make the AGW Fallacy Into Law

The objective sought at COP 21 has been a long time coming. Obama revealed how important this was to some factions of the NWO when he stated that his “definition of leadership would be leading on climate change, an international accord that potentially we’ll get in Paris, in response to the assertion put forth by the interviewer that Putin was challenging Obama’s leadership. If worldwide climate change laws are just as important to the NWO as controlling Syria, it gives you some idea of what is at stake here. Some have also suggested that the upcoming COP 21 was the reason former Aussie PM Tony Abbott lost leadership of his party (Abbot was strongly opposed to the idea of AGW) and replaced with pro-AGW and Goldman Sachs man, Malcolm Turnbull.

Normally, the annual COP (Conference of Parties) meets to review the implementation of the “Rio Convention”, drawn up at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992. It includes the UNFCCC (UN Framework on Climate Change) which entered into force in 1994 and has 195 signatory parties. This time, COP 21 will be going all out with extra gusto to create a new set of planetary laws to ensure every nation must combat climate change, with the purported aim “of keeping global warming below 2°C“.


Embarrassingly for the AGW promoters, as we head into COP 21, recent studies suggest possible global cooling, and certainly not global warming.

A Few Problems for COP 21: Antarctica, Greenland and the Arctic Aren’t Cooperating

Unfortunately for the global governance enthusiasts, who seek universal “consensus” among all nations and parts of the Earth, there are many factions that are not cooperating – include a couple of massive areas of ice, and a continent. Very recent data reports from multiple sources (NASA and AGU/BAS [American Geophysical Union and British Antarctic Survey]) are suggesting that not only is Antarctica not succumbing to global warming, but just the reverse – it is freezing over. Here are some quotes from the studies; this first one is from the NASA study:

“A new NASA study says that an increase in Antarctic snow accumulation that began 10,000 years ago is currently adding enough ice to the continent to outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers … According to the new analysis of satellite data, the Antarctic ice sheet showed a net gain of 112 billion tons of ice a year from 1992 to 2001. That net gain slowed to 82 billion tons of ice per year between 2003 and 2008.”

The net gain may have slowed, but that is still a gigantic amount of ice to gain. This next one is from the joint AGU/BAS study:

Since the record is 300 years long, we can see that the amount of snow that has been accumulating in this region since the 1990s is the highest we have seen in the last 300 years … Annual snow accumulation increased in the early 20th century, rising 30 percent between 1900 and 2010.”


COP 21: Capitalizing on fear mongering like has always been done?

Meanwhile, around the North Pole, the same thing seems to be happening. Tony Heller of Steven Goddard reports thatIce growth in Greenland continues at record levels this fall. The surface of Greenland has gained 200 billion tons of snow and ice in the last eight weeks. This has been accompanied by record cold weather approaching -60C” and also that “Arctic sea ice extent is at a ten year high for the date, after record growth“.

Maybe the NWO controllers should have made anthropogenic global cooling their crusade, and fooled people into some other kind of tax based on plummeting temperatures … oh, wait a minute, they did (see image above)! I guess it’s too late to reverse course now … although with the vague term climate change anything is possible.

Leading French Meteorologist Verdier Busts AGW in His Book, Loses Job

In what is very interesting timing for France, one of their leading meteorologists, Philippe Verdier, recently published a book Climat Investigation (Climate Investigation), where he accuses climate change scientists and the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) of manipulating the data. As Verdier states in this video, My book ‘Climate Investigation’ was published one month ago. It got me banned from the air waves, and according to RT also said that he had put himself “in the path of COP 21, which is a bulldozer, and this is the result.”


Dissent is also a high form of thinking for yourself, being an individual and not going along with the uninformed masses.

Consensus? Far From It: Look at All the Dissenters in the Run Up to COP 21

The more you look, the more you find dissenters from all over the Earth who are speaking out against the highly politicized AGW climate change movement as COP 21 approaches. Unfortunately for the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, the UN, the IPCC and all their stooges and mouthpieces, the UN has failed to achieve consensus (one of its favorite buzzwords) on climate change, and the science is settled only in one way – showing that the world is not really warming at all, and that man’s contribution to climate change is insignificant. There are a plethora of dissenting individuals, scientists and organizations with massive research behind them showing that AGW is a political movement to usher in global governance:

NIPCC: The Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change is an international panel of nongovernment scientists and scholars who have come together to understand the causes and consequences of climate change. They published the 2009 report Climate Change Reconsidered which they claim “is the most comprehensive critique of the IPCC’s positions ever published. It lists 35 contributors and reviewers from 14 countries and presents in an appendix the names of 31,478 American scientists who have signed a petition sayingthere is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate’.”;

1000+ dissenting scientists: as of 2010, there were more than 1000 international scientists (up from 700) who came out and publicly went on the record to state that AGW is a flawed model. The list includes many current and former UN IPCC scientists, who have now turned against the UN IPCC;

– This list of scientists who oppose the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming;

John Casey: this former White House space program advisor believes in global cooling, and that the Earth is on the brink of a major ice age;

Christopher Monckton: this former advisor to the UK Prime Minister has done a great job exposing the fear mongering and junk science behind the global warming movement, which is really a cover for implementing cap-and-trade (favoring big corporations) and global government. He quotes how Al Gore admitting his own sensationalism: “I believe it’s appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations of how dangerous it is”;

Ian Plimer: this Australian geologist humorously calls the AGW movement a “load of hot air” and has shown how the data measurements for climate change have been totally rigged. He also points out how environmentalism has replaced organized religion as a matter of personal faith.;

– Russia: Many have referenced Russian President Putin’s disdain for the idea of AGW, and have reported that he believes that “there is no global warming, that this is a fraud to restrain the industrial development of several countries, including Russia,” and that maybe global warming will mean Russians “spend less on fur coats.”


COP 21: the endgame of the hijacked environmental movement

COP 21: Remember How It All Started …

COP 21 is the culmination of a very long-term plan, hatched by the NWO manipulators decades ago, and revealed in the documents like the Report from Iron Mountain and the Club of Rome. It is also important to note that COP 21 and AGW are the result of a Rothschild-Rockefeller attempt to create a One World Government. George Hunt was the whistleblower who was there at the start. He overheard and captured the actual voices of the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers and their top agents as the laid out their deceitful schemes, some of which you can hear in this video!

As William Jasper pointed out in The New American, the official draft text of the climate treaty to be agreed upon at COP 21 includes provisions for the establishment of an “International Tribunal of Climate Justice” (see pg. 19 of 34) – think World Court – which, alongside a world carbon tax, is yet another stepping stone to the New World Order. Make no mistake about it; there are some serious things planned at COP 21 which will affect every human being on the planet. It remains to be seen whether the people attending the conference will vote humanity further towards a One World Government based on carbon deception.


Want the latest commentary and analysis on Conspiracy, Natural Health, Sovereignty, Consciousness and more? Sign up for free blog updates!

Makia Freeman is the editor of alternative news / independent media site The Freedom Articles and senior researcher at, writing on many aspects of truth and freedom, from exposing aspects of the worldwide conspiracy to suggesting solutions for how humanity can create a new system of peace and abundance.









Read featured article here

TLB recommends you read more great/pertinent articles from The Freedom Articles.

The Liberty Beacon contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.



By Makia Freeman

Contributing Writer for Wake Up World

The hijacked environmental movement is a symptom of the current general, collective state of humanity: good hearted but ignorant. Many people in the environmental movement are in it for the right reasons: they see the ongoing poisoning and destruction of the planet, led by corporations, and are determined to defend and speak out for the Earth. Yet, in spite of their good intentions, they have unwittingly allowed themselves to be channeled in a direction that is not really going to help the Earth, unintentionally supporting the very forces that are responsible for the pillaging of it.

By continuing to push notions that carbon dioxide is a poison, that global warming exists and all of mankind is responsible for it, that we need a worldwide carbon tax and that we require Agenda 21-style global governance, these people are unknowingly promoting the New World Order program – and unwittingly placing elite controllers in power who don’t care about the environment and view it merely as a resource to be exploited. It has even gotten to the point where those opposing popular beliefs about climate change (another Rothschild-Rockefeller creation) are being treated like criminal extremists – there have even been calls in the US for Obama to prosecute them!

Welcome to Planet Earth. If your opinion diverges too much from the mainstream, you could get locked up for thinking “wrongly”.

With the current focus being on the outcomes of the recent 2015 UN Summit, the hackneyed buzzword of sustainability is being thrown around like there’s no tomorrow. In this context, it’s worth revisiting how the environmental movement came to be so hijacked and co-opted.

Basis for the Hijack: Conspiracy Reports from The Iron Mountain and The Club of Rome

The basis for the hijacked environment movement lies within formerly secret military reports, and one of the elite Round Table groups that run the world: the Club of Rome. I wonder if those who believe in AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming) or Manmade Global Warming have any idea that the elite came up with the idea of using mankind itself as the global threat against which we are all supposed to gather behind a One World Government? The 1966 Report from the Iron Mountain was commissioned by John F. Kennedy and considered by Lyndon B. Johnson as too dangerous to reveal to the public at the time when it was completed. This excerpt from it discusses how a global government could be imposed without war, and suggests the threat could instead be environmental pollution:

The possibility of war provides the sense of external necessity without which no government can long remain in power… An effective political substitute for war would require “alternate enemies,” some of which might seem equally farfetched in the context of the current war system. It may be, for instance, that gross pollution of the environment can eventually replace the possibility of mass destruction by nuclear weapons as the principal apparent threat to the survival of the species. Poisoning of the air, and of the principal sources of food and water supply, is already well advanced, and at first glance would seem promising in this respect; it constitutes a threat that can be dealt with only through social organization and political power. But from present indications it will be a generation to a generation and a half before environmental pollution, however severe, will be sufficiently menacing, on a global scale, to offer a possible basis… [however] the rate of pollution could be increased selectively for this purpose”.

The Club of Rome is one of 6 groups that are close to the center of the Rhodesian Round Table (ultimately funded by Rothschild) which also includes The Bilderberg Group, the CFR, the RIIA, the United Nations and The Trilateral Commission. The Club of Rome’s 1991 document entitled The First Global Revolution? contains this passage:

“In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together … all these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.”

Are You Being ‘Green Washed’?

The current environmental movement we see today was hijacked a long time ago. Let’s take a look at the top 4 fallacies the NWO conspirators have managed to get ‘greenies’ to believe.

The Hijacked Environmental Movement Fallacy #1: Carbon Dioxide is a Poison


Let’s start with the basics: carbon dioxide (CO2) is a nutrient, not a poison. We breathe out carbon dioxide every breath, but we also take some of it in on the inbreath. According to the IPCC (Interplanetary Panel on Climate Change), we are therefore poisoning ourselves every breath! Think about it – if CO2 were really a poison, why does it help plants grow so much? Why is it a key part of the fundamental equation of biology: sugar + oxygen = carbon dioxide + water + heat? How is it that those in the environmental movement are ignorant of basic biology?

As the website states, the more CO2 around, the better plants grow:

“In Idso and Idso’s (1994) analysis of soil nutrient limitations, the percentage growth enhancement due to a 300-ppm rise in the air’s CO2 content actually did exhibit a slight (but statistically non-significant) decline, dropping from 51% to 45% when nutrients went from non-growth-limiting to limiting in a group of 70 experiments. But when the atmospheric CO2 enrichment was 600 ppm, this slight negative trend reversed itself, going from a CO2-induced growth stimulation of 43% when nutrients were present in abundance to a 52% enhancement when their supply was sub-optimal. And for a 1200-ppm increase in atmospheric CO2, the percentage growth enhancement jumped from 60% when the soil nutrient supply was adequate to 207% when it was less-than-adequate.”

It’s a simple equation: the more CO2 you have, the more the plants like it, and the faster they will grow.

The demonization of carbon dioxide is not about helping the environment. The NWO idea has always been to attach the worsening condition of the environment to an individual’s energy usage – and even his or her breathing – so as to introduce a carbon tax. The Government literally wants to tax you for breathing – for merely being alive.

The Hijacked Environmental Movement Fallacy #2: The Manmade Global Warming Hoax

AGW or man-made global warming has been exposed as a giant scam. It still remains an open question whether the world is actually warming or cooling, given all the fakery and fudging of data, such as ClimateGate, where hackers found that scientists at the UK’s East Anglia University had deliberately distorted the figures. (See the work of Ian Plimer, Christopher Monckton and others in exposing this.) That is why the term global warming got changed to climate change – this way, no matter what happens with the weather, the IPCC can say the climate is changing. But climate change is a slick truism – you can’t argue against it. Of course the climate is changing. When has it not changed?

The great documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle years ago exposed the lies behind the very political climate change agenda. More than 1,000 dissenting scientists from around the globe have challenged the man-made global warming claims made by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), undermined its claims of scientific consensus, and shredded its credibility in the process. Furthermore, changes in climate (whether human behavior is causing them or not) are not necessarily bad; in some cases studies have suggested recent changes in climatic conditions are responsible for re-greening parts of the world and changing lives for the better. (see Geospatial Sciences Center of Excellence, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD 57007-3510)

The Hijacked Environmental Movement Fallacy #3: The Carbon Tax and Global Governance as Eco-Solutions


As pointed out above, all this focus on carbon is for one reason: taxation. The whole scheme to get people and corporations fixated on their carbon footprint – rather than how much actual benefit or harm they are doing the environment – is to pave the way for more taxation and centralization of power. To have a worldwide carbon tax, of course, you need a One World Government to enforce and collect it. The UN, ICLEI and its other subdivisions are constantly talking about global governance for this very reason.

In this context, “global governance” means centralizing vast amounts of power into a body destined to become the World Government, under the pretext of fighting man-made global warming or climate change. It also means extending the reach of the United Nations so that local bodies such as local councils and municipalities that belong to ICLEI, (the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, created in 1990 as a non-governmental spin-off of the United Nations) can implement its global directives and make it look ‘grassroots’, or like it was locally decided.

For further information on this topic, check out George Hunt’s work in exposing how Evelyn Rothschild and David Rockefeller were cooking up the cap-and-trade scheme in the 1980s. Hunt was present at some of the meetings where the carbon tax was first being discussed.

The Hijacked Environmental Movement Fallacy #4: Overpopulation

Mahatma Gandhi once said: “Earth provides enough to satisfy every man’s need, but not every man’s greed.” There is no doubt that rising populations can put a strain on resources, yet where is the proof that the Earth cannot support 7 billion people? Or 9 billion people? Is it really population that is the problem here, or is it rather self-centered greed and destructive environmental practices and technologies?

We can accept the world’s rising population not as a threat or a reason to justify killing (which goes by the euphemism of depopulation) but rather as a challenge. It can propel us into living more from the heart, to having more compassion for those less well off than us, to doing a better job of sharing, of distributing resources equitably. It can stimulate us into better modes of efficiency. Could the rising population help a critical mass of people awake to the truth of free energy, and the fact that free energy or over unity devices already exist which provide practically unlimited energy for free or very cheaply?

It has been known in many countries for a long time that as you increase education, you decrease population, naturally. There is no need for stealth sterilization programs, introducing contraceptives through vaccines or other depopulation murder programs. When people gain a higher education, they organically choose to have less kids. If the conspirators really cared about the planet’s population, why not use their money to help everyone access better education? The answer is, of course, that they don’t.


Underpinning the propaganda of overpopulation is eugenics. It’s the idea that some humans are superior to others, and that some humans don’t deserve to be here. This is really the philosophical and spiritual basis of the hijacking. As they have confessed, the conspirators in their delusions view the rest of the population as a virus that must be rid from the planet. Yet, the real virus is the fear mindset that runs the show in the brains of the elite controllers.

“In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.” ~ Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh

The Real Problem Isn’t Climate Change or Carbon

The real problem with the environment isn’t climate change or carbon, it’s that we as a collective species are trashing and degrading it. We spill oil in our oceans and rivers. We kill off species faster than we can even classify them. We make substances that don’t biodegrade and end up in giant landfills. We cut down forests without taking enough care to replace them. We use an economic system which incentivizes planned obsolescence and economically encourages us to throw things away rather than repair them. We let maniacal men rule out-of-control Governments that spray toxic weather-altering chemicals like barium, aluminum and strontium chemtrails all over the world – and get away with it.

What does any of this have to do with climate change or carbon? These 2 terms are a huge distraction and a deliberate way to trick people who genuinely care for the environment.

Solution: Get Informed Before You Demonstrate

Do you deeply care for the environment? Great! Then do your research first before joining any protests. Oppose fracking, GMOs, toxic energy systems, geoengineering, and corporate welfare to military companies (the Pentagon is the biggest polluter on planet).

Last year, in September 2014, around 400,000 people turned up in New York for the People’s Climate March – but what is the point of this activism if it gets diverted?

As journalist Naomi Klein wrote in an article for The Nation:

Some of the most powerful and wealthiest environmental organizations have… led the climate movement down various dead ends: carbon trading, carbon offsets, natural gas as a “bridge fuel” — what these policies all held in common is that they created the illusion of progress while allowing the fossil fuel companies to keep mining, drilling and fracking with abandon. We always knew that the groups pushing hardest for these false solutions took donations from, and formed corporate partnerships with, the big emitters. But this was explained away as an attempt at constructive engagement — using the power of the market to fix market failures. Now it turns out that some green groups are literally part owners of the industry causing the crisis they are purportedly trying to solve.

When it comes to our environment, as David Icke says, we need streetwise spirituality. We need to have our hearts in the right places, but also put our thinking caps on, otherwise we will easily by led astray by tricksters. Only once the leaders of the environmental movement have their hearts and brains in alignment can we effect real change on the ecosystems of Planet Earth.



Previous articles by Makia Freeman:

About the author:

Makia Freeman is the editor of The Freedom Articles and senior researcher at, writing on many aspects of truth and freedom, from exposing aspects of the global conspiracy to suggesting solutions for how humanity can create a new system of peace and abundance. An avid promoter of freedom, truth and health, his mission is to expose the truth, raise awareness about the conspiracy to enslave mankind and to help create a critical mass of people to stand up against it – and thus restore peace and freedom to the world.

Want to keep informed with news and analysis on the New World Order, Natural Health, Sovereignty and more? Visit for more, follow Tools For Freedom on Facebook or sign up for ‘The Freedom Articles’ blog updates.

Read featured article here

TLB recommends you visit  Wake Up World for more great/pertinent articles.

The Liberty Beacon contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.


Synthetic Chemicals Are Safer Than Natural Ones & Don’t Cause Disease… Wait, What?

By TLB Contributor: Anna Rodgers

Yes. You have read correctly, but this statement sure as heck didn’t come from me. I know that the opposite is true, that heavy metals and other toxins are incredibly dangerous and natural chemicals are far safer than synthetics. But there are many people and organizations out there, (with history proving time and time again) that just don’t want you to think this way.

They want you to ignore the truth and to live a life where you don’t take any control over your health, where you continue to buy all of the toxic products, dangerous medications and most importantly, do not take a stand about what the annual 3 trillion dollar chemical industry has done to all of us.

Let me tell you the back ground story of who is behind this ridiculous and very dangerous statement. Back in May of this year, one of the most popular newspapers in the UK, The Sun, wrote about my newly released, controversial book Toxic World, Toxic People.  On page 6, there was a full page dedicated to one of the chapters, Common Deadly Environmental Toxins from my book.

The article, What’s Your Poison by  journalist Helen Glibert, discussed 4 common toxins that we are all surrounded by daily. These 4 are, aluminum, mercury, lead and cadmium. Surprisingly, Helen wrote a credible piece, highlighting that aluminum exposure (and accumulation) can trigger cancer and lead to Alzheimer’s. [1] She also pointed out how mercury from fillings can leak, and prove to be toxic to the body. [2]

For me personally, to see the truth exposed in a mainstream media outlet was very exciting. Would people finally take notice and realize we are all being bombarded with heavy metals and chemicals in our daily lives?

Within a few days, the article and I had been targeted by a group called ‘Sense About Science’, who wrote a truly ridiculous response to the article. Their article titled The Moon – Tackling Misconceptions About Chemicals’  [3] was to tell the public that I was scaring people, there’s nothing to worry about when it comes to proven deadly neurotoxins such as mercury, aluminum, and lead.

Now, I’m assuming those that read Collective Evolution are a pretty cluey bunch of people – you don’t take crap, you know when someone is trying to pull the wool over your eyes, and you mostly likely are aware of things that most others are not. You also probably know that there’s a serious amount of people out there who want the truth about our health concealed, mainly in the name of corporate profit.

After I saw Sense About Science take a little hit at me, I decided to do some digging to see who these nancy naysayers actually were. Did they have credibility, who and what else do they ridicule and where the heck did they get their funding from?

The Bullies Of All Things ‘Alternative’

Well, it sure didn’t take me long to realize my suspicions were absolutely right on the money.

This organization is known to target anything and everything ‘alternative’. They rubbish homeopathy, are pro-vaccine, have very strong ties to GMO’s, are connected to political groups and have been behind some pretty nasty bullying campaigns targeting authors such as Patrick Holdford who wrote the groundbreaking book Food Is Better Medicine Than Drugs. I’ve since read a lot about this group and boy, they are certainly very dirty players.

And take a guess where Sense About Science get their funding from…a whole bunch of Cancer organizations, Alzheimer Societies, Drug Companies AND Chemical companies.  Yep, you can see it for yourself, right here.

When I discovered this, I suddenly became very aware that what I have written about in my book has made me a target by the chemical industry. They see this, along with all the other authors out there like me, trying to bring awareness to what the chemical industry has done to us, as a threat – we are exposing stuff they want people to ignore. Perhaps because they’ve got trillions of dollars at stake.

Imagine that the world suddenly all came to the realization that chemicals are causing most of the cancers, or that aluminum exposure (which we all come into contact with on a daily basis from our foods, beauty products, the air we breathe, the water we drink and medications we take) is the main reason behind the monstrous rise in Alzheimer’s and that we just finally realized collectively we have been, and still are, being lied to on a daily basis.  What would we say to the people and organizations that have been perpetuating these lies and hurting us and our children for decades?

anna-4570 copy

When we know that childhood cancers are the highest they have ever been in all of history, and that if all of this is possibly linked to chemicals, then God damn those companies who put these chemicals out into the world without doing the proper safety testing. They are responsible for destroying the lives of our friends, our family and our children.

‘They’ lied to us about DDT, and said it was safe. We now know undeniably it’s not, because after much pressure, they banned it. They lied to us about lead, a fatally toxic substance. It lowers children’s IQ, harms bone density and causes both concentration problems and behavioural issues such as is commonly seen in autistic children. Lead was also finally banned.

We all know ‘they’ tried to keep the truth about smoking hidden as long as they could. They tried dirty tactics, paid people off, used doctors and scientists to say it was safe until the people rose up and finally sued the tobacco industry.

The question begs, how many other lies are we being told on a daily basis about what is toxic or not?

I wrote the book Toxic World Toxic People to help answer questions like these, and to provide people with solutions as to how to try and beat this chemical epidemic. I’m a mother and I want my daughter  (as well as you and your kids) to have a fighting chance at being healthy. Our kids, and everyone else for that matter, deserve better and we’ve got to fight for it.

For more information check out my highly regarded book, Toxic World Toxic People – The Essential Guide To Health, Happiness, Parenting & Conscious Living, available on Amazon and for free on Kindle.



About The Author:


Anna Rodgers is an Australian born blogger, founder of and travel writer for Yoga magazine. She is an ex ‘eco’ model and was the face of St Erasmus Ethical Jewelery for three seasons. Anna is also the author of the recipe book Simply The Best – 100 Living Food Recipes by 22 of The Worlds Most Talented Raw Chefs.  Her health and well-being book aimed at teens is due for release for the end 2015.  Anna lives in East Sussex with her husband Nathan and daughter Lola.


TLB recommends you visit Collective Evolution for more pertinent articles and information.

See featured article HERE

The Liberty Beacon contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

  • Subscribe to Blog via Email

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

    Join 978 other subscribers