TiLTNews Network: Earth Watch - Freedom is defined by the ability of citizens to live without government interference, not by safety. It is easy to clamor for government security when terrible things happen; but liberty is given true meaning when we support it without exception, and we will be safer for it ~ Dr. Ron Paul
Friday, January 23, 2015
» Thousands Protest Roe v. Wade Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!
» Thousands Protest Roe v. Wade Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!
Kansas Senate bill would let any legal gun owner secretly carry without permit
Carrying concealed currently requires a gun-safety training class and a state-issued permit.
Kansas Senate bill would let any legal gun owner secretly carry without permit
Adan
Fri, 23 Jan 2015 21:09:19 GMT
New Data and Study Proves Astrology?
Alec Cope
Guest Writer, ZenGardner.com
as·trol·o·gy
noun \?-?strä-l?-j?\
: the study of how the positions of the stars and movements of the planets have a supposed influence on events and on the lives and behavior of people.
– Merriam-Webster Dictionary
A recent Norwegian study, found that humans born during solar minimums (periods of lesser Sun activity) live 5 years more than people born during solar periods of higher activity.
The researchers examined the lives of 8,600 people born in between the years of 1676 to 1878 and they noticed this reoccurring trend. They then established that higher Sun rays affected the amino acids during higher periods of energy – therefore damaging the acids more so than the calm, to say for lack of a better term. Of course, astrology has not been given more credence in light of this.
Pictured is Nasa data on peak levels of solar activity – indicated by higher levels of sunspots – from 1750 to 2014 (image source)
Astrology claims that stars and movements of the planets have a supposed influence on events and on the lives and behavior of people, as stated in the definition above.
Key word: influence – since the Sun affects us it offers more insight into the term, “astrology.” But wait a second, there’s more to this topic that must be considered. A real science to this.
Let’s get this clear, water has a memory. Some in mainstream “science” wish to “debate” this “theory,” one cause for this is because if they accept this, they must also accept homeopathic healing. Homeopathy is the medicine of using water to retain the information of plant parts – when this is ingested it balances the energy in your body. Allegedly, I’ve never had it done myself, but they do not believe this because they cannot see plant particles by the time the water is ready. “It can’t work, there isn’t any plant particles left!” Oh, but there is. It was scientifically proven several years ago.
The peer-reviewed scientific journal Nature published a study in 1988 detailing the science of water memory. Some have dismissed this study and that is alright. One who has dismissed it is a scientist who brushed off a new study, that I will detail in a moment. He said he “looked really hard” to find the citations for the said study and found “nothing.” However, some of his commenters found data within a two minute window, including a book for the public to read that describes the experiments in detail.
In 2012 the Aerospace Institute of the University of Stuttgart, Germany found that water retains information. They created technology that enables them to photograph the physical structure of water.
In 2004 the researchers conducted an interesting experiment. They instructed four students to retrieve water from the same source, then drop a row of four droplets each, per student. The water “remembered” each students’ unique “imprint” seamlessly:
Water remembers information, so what? Well, this is where it gets very intriguing. The researchers also found that human blood remembers music, it remembers sound.
Since the human body (which has blood in it) is 50-70% water this is no surprise. Lets take this a bit further and expand this theme shall we? Russian scientist Dr. Peter Gariaev lead a research group into the theme that DNA can affect its surroundings. That DNA itself has a memory, or an information pattern that can be memorized by the environment and perhaps even manipulated. Peter Gariaev showed through his experiments that DNA and sound waves correspond with one another. Gariaev also alleges that DNA itself not only possesses its own memory but also an awareness of its own surroundings and its own consciousness – a little similar to the water theme huh?
Scientist Harry Bigelsen found that human blood memorizes all illness throughout the body. So if you have a broken leg, Bigelsen can use what he calls Symplast to “photograph” your blood and establish an illness far more accurately and faster than any method today. Any method propped by mainstream medicine that is. He calls it holographic blood:
Blood showing illness, view in detail here
Nobel peace prize winner Luc Montagnier found that DNA can imprint on its environment. Once the DNA was removed during the experiments it could still be detected by his instruments. He later filed a patent for technology that can more accurately detect “phantom DNA” as he calls it.
DNA and water can be affected by sound, their very physical makeup can be altered and rewritten via sound and energy and it has its own memory. It is also a two way street, in terms of it also imprinting on the environment. Just like an interactive game, you give the gave input and it will give it back to you. What this means we have a relationship with reality that we never fully understood the significance of. Now lets remember that thoughts have their own energy and can be measured as well. What power do our own thoughts have when we can reprogram our own DNA?? Hey, while we’re at it – words are sounds too aren’t they? The implications for this understanding have opened an entirely new view of the universe and us as humanity. I feel this must be explored deeper. It is no surprise therefore, that studies are showing phototherapy (using light to heal the body) make teeth heal faster, cure ulcers and a multitude of other illness. Big Pharma never told you about that one did they?
We interact with reality in a far more fluid way than we ever understood before. But hey, lets wrap this up with astrology.
Whenever the sun enters very high levels of activity it affects life on this planet, so when it was publicly stated that the Sun and the Earth have magnetic portals that connect the two this is no surprise. Scientists also didn’t believe this was “possible” until recently, but let’s remember: Just because they don’t believe it’s true doesn’t mean that it isn’t still true.
Our star (image source)
It has been documented over and over again that the number of sunspots in coherence with this planet, will relate to the number of historical events on this planet. We’re talking about revolutions, renaissance – evolution. Joe Martino, creator of this amazing website performed a Ted Talk and goes into detail about this subject. I highly recommend watching this. The Global Coherence Initiative has heavily documented this and other phenomena and I highly recommend reviewing this information and creating your own conclusion. They also found that the sun can give us information input! We can “learn” from the Sun!
It is no secret that our moon affects human behavior, including increasing murder and psychotic action amongst the population during full moon cycles. British police departments even add more officers during shifts that occur with the full moon, including eclipses. Hence the term: lunatic = lunar-tic.
Manic Moon (source)
Here is where we wrap this baby up and send it home. We have understood the theme: sound and energy affect us on a whole new level we never understood before. It can affect our very genetic structure, even enhancing our consciousness via sound. Guess what? As it turns out, he Sun emits sound:
Mythologically, the planet Saturn has been worshiped as the God of time, death, rape, institutions, authority and an assortment of other connotations similar to this. Saturn also has an odd and almost haunting sound:
Saturn also gives off 2.5 times more heat than it receives from the Sun, NASA also recently discovered a super giant Saturn ring that swallows this planet. This giant of a planet emits more energy than it receives, those who know David Icke and his work, understand he alleges Saturn is actually a brown dwarf star. Perhaps he’s not too far off?
Artist’s impression (image source)
What does this mean? I don’t really know, but I do know that there is something happening here. There is a relationship between heavenly bodies and us that is very significant. This is a new science, a new frontier that will be explored and I am convinced there will be many many new discoveries that will benefit us as a whole. Take note, not all of my details may be correct, but it is the theme that is important. I sincerely hope I offered a new perspective into your life that you found wholesome and true. If this information felt right to you, follow it. It may bring you to some interesting places. As always, thank you so much for reading.
+++
New Data and Study Proves Astrology?
Elle
Fri, 23 Jan 2015 19:25:01 GMT
What Part of Shall Not Be Infringed Do You Not Understand? - The Prepper Journal
What Part of Shall Not Be Infringed Do You Not Understand? - The Prepper Journal
2014@prepperjournal
The UN’s Arms Trade Treaty which covers everything from small arms to battle tanks, combat aircraft and warships – will enter into force on 24 December 2014, Christmas Eve. This treaty has not been ratified by our Congress but has the support of our Secretary of State, John Kerry who signed it and our President, who without expressly mentioning the treaty, said in a speech at the UN in September that all nations “must meet our responsibility to observe and enforce international norms.” The problem with that statement and this treaty is that we the people aren’t in control of what those ‘international norms’ are and as we have seen time and time again, those international norms might be detrimental to our country.
Many preppers and 2nd Amendment proponents believe that the Arms Trade Treaty will first lead to registration of all firearms and when that happens, historically the next step is confiscation through some means. Technically, no treaty can be put into action in the United States unless it has been ratified by a 2/3 majority of the senate. This fact is what most people cite when they are trying to refute any legitimate concerns about the UN Arms Trade Treaty or any other treaty’s potential effect on our country. This sounds well and good and serves to placate some, but for this fail-safe to have any weight you would first need to have a government that followed the letter of the constitution and additionally, that government would need to follow the wishes of the citizens they are representing.
Our government has proven time and time again that following the constitution is simply not something they feel they have to do when it stands in their way. For example, the senate has never voted on the Kyoto Protocol but that hasn’t stopped the EPA from enacting rules complying with the main goals of that treaty. Coal plants are being shut down left and right while the US and China recently agreed to let China keep growing their output of carbon emissions (with coal power plants) until 2030. There are many examples of policies that are enacted that fall well outside the bounds of Constitutional limits on power but that doesn’t stop our representatives does it? On any issue there is more brainpower spent on finding ways around the Constitution than actually following it with the seeming goal of every single facet of law being finally decided by the Supreme Court. It’s as if in our society, the rules we decided long ago to set for ourselves are only as good as the interpretations of people today and if every single thing can be challenged (and in some cases changed), we don’t really have a Constitution at all. What we have is a framework for legal arguments that only establishes a baseline which can be over ruled completely by a simple majority of ideology on the bench.
Choeung Ek Memorial – The site of a former orchard and mass grave of victims of the Khmer Rouge – killed between 1975 and 1979.
As for a government that listens to their constituents, that long gone relic of thought is promised by every single person running for office. “I feel your pain” The truth of the matter is that in this day and age, every politician is a benefactor of the same special interests. There are no democrat and republican sides whenever both are receiving money from the same companies. The elected politicians, by overwhelming majority do not care what you say or want because they don’t answer to you. Their actions directly contradict election results, polls and public outcry. The 2014 mid-term elections recently held should have sent a very strong signal to the leadership of both parties that the country wasn’t on-board with the policies of the current administration and the direction of affairs with the Congress, however; Obamacare and Amnesty both remain intact without so much as a whimper from our newly elected majority who promised for years to repeal it as soon as they were ‘in power’. To add insult to injury, the Republicans just released a 1 trillion budget proposal just over 24 hours before a procedural vote on it knowing that nobody would have time to read it. Same tricks but a different face is behind the podium. Why should we expect anything different from what we have been seeing?
Do you really feel that there is anything ‘your party’ is going to do to stop elements of this treaty from being implemented if it is in their best interests?
What’s so wrong with simply registering all guns?
What’s the harm in simply registering you say? It makes sense that government would want to know who has guns, so they can ensure that bad people don’t have them. You can’t argue with that logic can you? Well yes I can try. Registration will only be done by law-abiding people. The criminals they will try to get you to believe this registration would stop would never turn themselves or their guns in. If that were true, why wouldn’t criminals be lining up a police offices every day because we do have laws already, don’t we? How is this not obvious to everyone? I maintain that it is obvious to the people who are pushing for any restriction and by that I am referring to registration, of our 2ndamendment rights.
Do guns kill people? Yes they do, but deaths by guns are a small fraction of the total deaths in the US each year. If you want to know who really kills people you have to look at governments historically.
Turkish official teasing starved Armenian children by showing bread during the Armenian Genocide, 1915
Yes, you read that right. Governments are responsible for more deaths of their citizens in the 20thcentury than any other unnatural cause. It is called Democide and is been documented by R. J. Rummel, formerly of the University of Hawaii Political Science Department. He writes:
Most probably near 170,000,000 people have been murdered in cold-blood by governments, well over three-quarters by absolutist regimes. The most such killing was done by the Soviet Union (near 62,000,000 people), the communist government of China is second (near 35,000,000), followed by Nazi Germany(almost 21,000,000), and Nationalist China (some 10,000,000). Lesser megamurderers include WWII Japan, Khmer Rouge Cambodia, WWI Turkey, communist Vietnam, post-WWII Poland, Pakistan, and communist Yugoslavia. The most intense democide was carried out by the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, where they killed over 30 percent of their subjects in less than four years.
The best predictor of this killing is regime power. The more arbitrary power a regime has, the less democratic it is, and the more likely it will kill its subjects or foreigners. The conclusion is that power kills, absolute power kills absolutely.
But we live in a democracy in the United States and we elect our representatives. We have a rule of law and nothing like the atrocities you mention above would ever happen here. Really? I certainly hope not and so it is with much interest that I have and will be keeping track of what goes on after December 24th and into the future on this topic.
But Mr. Rummel’s statement has weight in historical precedence and is alarming when looked at from the context of where we are as a country today. One could argue that our regime has an increasingly disturbing amount of ‘arbitrary power’. That is power that they have assumed that is outside of the Constitution and the really fun part is they keep giving themselves more of it every day. Some of this power was enacted by law of course, but it is power nonetheless and it never decreases, it only becomes more vast. From the Patriot Act, to NSA Spying, to treaties with foreign nations, harassment of political parties, to illegal searches, illegal detainment without cause, tokilling people without a trial and just yesterday they passed a bill which grants the government and law enforcement “unlimited access to the communications of every American”. How much power is that?
What does this mean to preppers?
Our second amendment was written expressly to give we the people a means to protect ourselves from a tyrannical government. This wasn’t about ‘letting us have’ weapons for hunting or shooting clay pigeons. The second amendment says that our right to bear arms ‘shall not be infringed’. It doesn’t say what type of arms meaning that you can assume they only meant musket loaders. It was intentionally open and only spoke to our rights, not the specifics of the weapons.
The Supreme Court even stated in the Heller decision that the second amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects an individual’s right to own firearms for traditionally lawful purposes, such asself-defense within the home. Even with that they left some ambiguity by allowing certain restrictions to gun ownership. This argument over who can have guns and what limits authority should put on gun ownership is not going away even with this ruling and it seems that challenges to the amendment could happen one day in that ongoing process we have called the courts. I can see that on the horizon again as new actions are taken in an effort to limit the ability American’s have of defending themselves because that is what it is all about. The UN and other anti-gun voices do not believe you have a right to self-defense. So you have to ask yourself why a bunch of representatives from countries that do not recognize the fundamental right to possess weapons are so keen to take ours. They prefer to give that power solely to the State which takes me back to Democide.
Following the public announcement of the establishment of the Lodz ghetto on February 8, 1940, Jews were expelled from all other parts of the city and moved into the ghetto area. 164,000 Jews were imprisoned in the ghetto when the Germans sealed it off on April 30, 1940.
Why would we willingly give away our rights to self-defense when time after time it has been shown to be the ones we have the most to fear from are the very ones telling us we don’t need guns?
I have written before about the phrase “From my cold dead hands” and I haven’t changed my opinion. I do not say that phrase lightly, but I wonder if there will be a decision we face in our future that could have far-reaching impacts on the security of our lives. Each of us should carefully consider the larger picture of events that are happening in our world. We may not get the disaster you are expecting, that would necessitate throwing on our bug out bags and living under a tarp. We may face a different enemy who will come to us with a message of “common sense reforms” and wrap this all in a promise of “keeping everyone safe”. Take that with a grain of salt and remember the words of Alexander Solzhenitsyn in the Gulag Archipelago. Gulag was his literary-historical record of the vast system of prisons and labor camps that came into being shortly after theBolsheviks seized power in Russia in 1917 and underwent an enormous expansion during the rule of Stalin from 1924 to 1953. It is a fascinating read and warning to those who can see the echos of history in our country and around the world today.
“During an arrest, you think since you are not guilty, how can they arrest you? Why should you run away? And how can you resist right then? After all, you’ll only make your situation worse; you will make it more difficult for them to sort out the mistake.
And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say goodbye to his family?
Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?
The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! We did not love freedom enough. Every man always has handy a dozen glib little reasons why he is right not to sacrifice himself.”
For what it’s worth, I do not believe that we will most likely see bands of armed soldiers rounding up whole cities as they did during the Soviet Union days Solzhenitsyn lived through. I do think we will need to make a choice and I think we should be guarded even more so about how far we let things slip away from us. The arbitrary power that keeps building, if left unchecked would be the same as not resisting in Solzhenitsyn’s days. If you don’t put up a fight, you might not like what happens to you.
We say “What part of Shall Not Be Infringed Do You Not Understand” as a way of challenging anyone who believes that guns and firearms only belong in the hands of the military or police. It is an in-your-face type of confrontation that we employ to convey the frustration and absurdity of the issue in our minds. Perhaps that message should be one that we ask ourselves? Maybe we are the ones who need to remember “Shall Not Be Infringed” more so than the people who want to excuse away that right. Maybe the lessons of history and the rights we have shouldn’t be used as an argument with people who will never be persuaded. Perhaps, the message is one we need to take to heart and live out to the expectations of those brave men who recorded this phrase for us. We are the only ones who need to remember this right and by that same token, we are the only ones who can lose it willingly.
2014@prepperjournal
The UN’s Arms Trade Treaty which covers everything from small arms to battle tanks, combat aircraft and warships – will enter into force on 24 December 2014, Christmas Eve. This treaty has not been ratified by our Congress but has the support of our Secretary of State, John Kerry who signed it and our President, who without expressly mentioning the treaty, said in a speech at the UN in September that all nations “must meet our responsibility to observe and enforce international norms.” The problem with that statement and this treaty is that we the people aren’t in control of what those ‘international norms’ are and as we have seen time and time again, those international norms might be detrimental to our country.
Many preppers and 2nd Amendment proponents believe that the Arms Trade Treaty will first lead to registration of all firearms and when that happens, historically the next step is confiscation through some means. Technically, no treaty can be put into action in the United States unless it has been ratified by a 2/3 majority of the senate. This fact is what most people cite when they are trying to refute any legitimate concerns about the UN Arms Trade Treaty or any other treaty’s potential effect on our country. This sounds well and good and serves to placate some, but for this fail-safe to have any weight you would first need to have a government that followed the letter of the constitution and additionally, that government would need to follow the wishes of the citizens they are representing.
Our government has proven time and time again that following the constitution is simply not something they feel they have to do when it stands in their way. For example, the senate has never voted on the Kyoto Protocol but that hasn’t stopped the EPA from enacting rules complying with the main goals of that treaty. Coal plants are being shut down left and right while the US and China recently agreed to let China keep growing their output of carbon emissions (with coal power plants) until 2030. There are many examples of policies that are enacted that fall well outside the bounds of Constitutional limits on power but that doesn’t stop our representatives does it? On any issue there is more brainpower spent on finding ways around the Constitution than actually following it with the seeming goal of every single facet of law being finally decided by the Supreme Court. It’s as if in our society, the rules we decided long ago to set for ourselves are only as good as the interpretations of people today and if every single thing can be challenged (and in some cases changed), we don’t really have a Constitution at all. What we have is a framework for legal arguments that only establishes a baseline which can be over ruled completely by a simple majority of ideology on the bench.
Choeung Ek Memorial – The site of a former orchard and mass grave of victims of the Khmer Rouge – killed between 1975 and 1979.
As for a government that listens to their constituents, that long gone relic of thought is promised by every single person running for office. “I feel your pain” The truth of the matter is that in this day and age, every politician is a benefactor of the same special interests. There are no democrat and republican sides whenever both are receiving money from the same companies. The elected politicians, by overwhelming majority do not care what you say or want because they don’t answer to you. Their actions directly contradict election results, polls and public outcry. The 2014 mid-term elections recently held should have sent a very strong signal to the leadership of both parties that the country wasn’t on-board with the policies of the current administration and the direction of affairs with the Congress, however; Obamacare and Amnesty both remain intact without so much as a whimper from our newly elected majority who promised for years to repeal it as soon as they were ‘in power’. To add insult to injury, the Republicans just released a 1 trillion budget proposal just over 24 hours before a procedural vote on it knowing that nobody would have time to read it. Same tricks but a different face is behind the podium. Why should we expect anything different from what we have been seeing?
Do you really feel that there is anything ‘your party’ is going to do to stop elements of this treaty from being implemented if it is in their best interests?
What’s so wrong with simply registering all guns?
What’s the harm in simply registering you say? It makes sense that government would want to know who has guns, so they can ensure that bad people don’t have them. You can’t argue with that logic can you? Well yes I can try. Registration will only be done by law-abiding people. The criminals they will try to get you to believe this registration would stop would never turn themselves or their guns in. If that were true, why wouldn’t criminals be lining up a police offices every day because we do have laws already, don’t we? How is this not obvious to everyone? I maintain that it is obvious to the people who are pushing for any restriction and by that I am referring to registration, of our 2ndamendment rights.
Do guns kill people? Yes they do, but deaths by guns are a small fraction of the total deaths in the US each year. If you want to know who really kills people you have to look at governments historically.
Turkish official teasing starved Armenian children by showing bread during the Armenian Genocide, 1915
Yes, you read that right. Governments are responsible for more deaths of their citizens in the 20thcentury than any other unnatural cause. It is called Democide and is been documented by R. J. Rummel, formerly of the University of Hawaii Political Science Department. He writes:
Most probably near 170,000,000 people have been murdered in cold-blood by governments, well over three-quarters by absolutist regimes. The most such killing was done by the Soviet Union (near 62,000,000 people), the communist government of China is second (near 35,000,000), followed by Nazi Germany(almost 21,000,000), and Nationalist China (some 10,000,000). Lesser megamurderers include WWII Japan, Khmer Rouge Cambodia, WWI Turkey, communist Vietnam, post-WWII Poland, Pakistan, and communist Yugoslavia. The most intense democide was carried out by the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, where they killed over 30 percent of their subjects in less than four years.
The best predictor of this killing is regime power. The more arbitrary power a regime has, the less democratic it is, and the more likely it will kill its subjects or foreigners. The conclusion is that power kills, absolute power kills absolutely.
But we live in a democracy in the United States and we elect our representatives. We have a rule of law and nothing like the atrocities you mention above would ever happen here. Really? I certainly hope not and so it is with much interest that I have and will be keeping track of what goes on after December 24th and into the future on this topic.
But Mr. Rummel’s statement has weight in historical precedence and is alarming when looked at from the context of where we are as a country today. One could argue that our regime has an increasingly disturbing amount of ‘arbitrary power’. That is power that they have assumed that is outside of the Constitution and the really fun part is they keep giving themselves more of it every day. Some of this power was enacted by law of course, but it is power nonetheless and it never decreases, it only becomes more vast. From the Patriot Act, to NSA Spying, to treaties with foreign nations, harassment of political parties, to illegal searches, illegal detainment without cause, tokilling people without a trial and just yesterday they passed a bill which grants the government and law enforcement “unlimited access to the communications of every American”. How much power is that?
What does this mean to preppers?
Our second amendment was written expressly to give we the people a means to protect ourselves from a tyrannical government. This wasn’t about ‘letting us have’ weapons for hunting or shooting clay pigeons. The second amendment says that our right to bear arms ‘shall not be infringed’. It doesn’t say what type of arms meaning that you can assume they only meant musket loaders. It was intentionally open and only spoke to our rights, not the specifics of the weapons.
The Supreme Court even stated in the Heller decision that the second amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects an individual’s right to own firearms for traditionally lawful purposes, such asself-defense within the home. Even with that they left some ambiguity by allowing certain restrictions to gun ownership. This argument over who can have guns and what limits authority should put on gun ownership is not going away even with this ruling and it seems that challenges to the amendment could happen one day in that ongoing process we have called the courts. I can see that on the horizon again as new actions are taken in an effort to limit the ability American’s have of defending themselves because that is what it is all about. The UN and other anti-gun voices do not believe you have a right to self-defense. So you have to ask yourself why a bunch of representatives from countries that do not recognize the fundamental right to possess weapons are so keen to take ours. They prefer to give that power solely to the State which takes me back to Democide.
Following the public announcement of the establishment of the Lodz ghetto on February 8, 1940, Jews were expelled from all other parts of the city and moved into the ghetto area. 164,000 Jews were imprisoned in the ghetto when the Germans sealed it off on April 30, 1940.
Why would we willingly give away our rights to self-defense when time after time it has been shown to be the ones we have the most to fear from are the very ones telling us we don’t need guns?
I have written before about the phrase “From my cold dead hands” and I haven’t changed my opinion. I do not say that phrase lightly, but I wonder if there will be a decision we face in our future that could have far-reaching impacts on the security of our lives. Each of us should carefully consider the larger picture of events that are happening in our world. We may not get the disaster you are expecting, that would necessitate throwing on our bug out bags and living under a tarp. We may face a different enemy who will come to us with a message of “common sense reforms” and wrap this all in a promise of “keeping everyone safe”. Take that with a grain of salt and remember the words of Alexander Solzhenitsyn in the Gulag Archipelago. Gulag was his literary-historical record of the vast system of prisons and labor camps that came into being shortly after theBolsheviks seized power in Russia in 1917 and underwent an enormous expansion during the rule of Stalin from 1924 to 1953. It is a fascinating read and warning to those who can see the echos of history in our country and around the world today.
“During an arrest, you think since you are not guilty, how can they arrest you? Why should you run away? And how can you resist right then? After all, you’ll only make your situation worse; you will make it more difficult for them to sort out the mistake.
And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say goodbye to his family?
Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?
The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! We did not love freedom enough. Every man always has handy a dozen glib little reasons why he is right not to sacrifice himself.”
For what it’s worth, I do not believe that we will most likely see bands of armed soldiers rounding up whole cities as they did during the Soviet Union days Solzhenitsyn lived through. I do think we will need to make a choice and I think we should be guarded even more so about how far we let things slip away from us. The arbitrary power that keeps building, if left unchecked would be the same as not resisting in Solzhenitsyn’s days. If you don’t put up a fight, you might not like what happens to you.
We say “What part of Shall Not Be Infringed Do You Not Understand” as a way of challenging anyone who believes that guns and firearms only belong in the hands of the military or police. It is an in-your-face type of confrontation that we employ to convey the frustration and absurdity of the issue in our minds. Perhaps that message should be one that we ask ourselves? Maybe we are the ones who need to remember “Shall Not Be Infringed” more so than the people who want to excuse away that right. Maybe the lessons of history and the rights we have shouldn’t be used as an argument with people who will never be persuaded. Perhaps, the message is one we need to take to heart and live out to the expectations of those brave men who recorded this phrase for us. We are the only ones who need to remember this right and by that same token, we are the only ones who can lose it willingly.
Thinking About your Neighborhood from a Tactical Perspective
Yesterday I wrote about forming the Neighborhood Watch on Steroids and described a situation where you might need to join together with others in your neighborhood to provide defense from people or groups looking to do you harm or simply steal what is yours. Long ago, there were no such thing as police officers who roamed around in their cars connected by radio and dispatchers who monitored a central 911 system. If trouble broke out, you and your family were on your own. You may have been able to rely on neighbors if they lived close enough, but the defense of your property was a personal responsibility.
Flash forward to today and for a whole host of reasons our society has largely abdicated this responsibility to law enforcement. While there are many noble police officers out there, they are woefully outnumbered when it comes to people so while they may arrive in time to help, usually the police arrive after the drama has occurred and try to sort out the players as best as they can. This isn’t ideal when our society is functioning as it should be. A police presence could be non-existent in a crisis or disaster and it will be back to you and possibly your neighbors to defend your village or neighborhood.
Again, I am not talking about some snow that keeps people at home. I am talking about chaos where for whatever reason, law enforcement is unable to get to you much less protect you and you have bad people who are trying to get in. For the rest of these articles, I am going to assume a national disaster that has rendered our nation in a crisis where there is no rule of law.
Rethinking your Neighborhood
Your neighborhood could be configured in all types of ways depending on where you live. In a larger city we might have boundaries that are simply streets. Your neighborhood might run a certain number of blocks ending at the river. It could be that your neighborhood is the traditional suburban subdivision complete with a sign out front. You could live in a gated community or your neighborhood might just be a dozen homes in the country.
Before you enact a plan to defend your neighborhood, it helps to think about a few things first.
Understand the Enemy – Who are you defending your neighborhood from? What kinds of threats could you expect to encounter? For the purposes of this article, we aren’t going to consider a professional military force. We will say that the enemy could be lone individuals or gangs who range from simply hungry and desperate to organized and violent. Depending on your location and the duration of the event, you might encounter all types of people.
Use Situational Awareness – This will be key to any defense and that is to know what you are protecting and who is trying to get in. The size of your defensive team will dictate how much area you can realistically try to secure. There are force multipliers obviously and we will get into those in an upcoming post, but you have to know your neighborhood better than anyone so that you can model your defensive strategies where you will have the most advantage.
In another post on Preparing your neighborhood against attack, I mentioned drawing out the boundaries. You may only be able to secure a couple of streets or even one street and it will help to draw out the streets identifying access areas, choke-points, natural cover and the assets you hope to control. Some resources you can use now are websites like MyTopo.com that will allow you to order a detailed topographic map of your entire area or Scribblemaps.com that will allow you to create your own maps and add symbols. Naturally, these would need to be taken care of before any crisis prevents you from access computers or the internet.
Use the defenders advantages
I mentioned also that virtually none of us have a walled compound so it isn’t like we can march along the wall and shine spotlights down on anyone trying to access your neighborhood like some type of Alcatraz Island. You will have to use the advantages you do have though to give you and the rest of your neighborhood defenders the upper hand. If someone does come into your neighborhood you will be able to rely on your strengths.
You will have the ability to fight from cover and to create fortified positions. Again, this is assuming a SHTF type of scenario. What can you use? Depending on the disaster, you can roll cars into position, refrigerators, use stones that used to form your ornamental garden walls. For me if this really was a disaster I would be looking to build my own foxholes and augment those with sandbags. Digging a hole is free and a lot of dirt makes great cover. With planning and enough resources (people) the routes into your neighborhood that you want to defend can be set up to be highly defensible.
You have the home field advantage. You know your neighborhood and where everything is. You will know where your partners are with rifles trained on the bad guys. Communication will augment this but we will get into that later as well. You will know where paths through the woods go, where fences are opened or where special defensive devices meant to injure or slow the enemy are hidden.
You have the ability to prepare. Anyone who is intent on coming into your neighborhood will only be able to observe from the outside what is going on provided you don’t have patrols outside of your area watching for this behavior. You can set up defensive positions, deploy obstacles to prevent unwanted vehicle traffic and reinforce as you go along. If this is a gang who is somewhat organized they could have experience offensively, but they will not have had as much time as you to prepare your neighborhood to be defended against them.
In the next article, I will be talking about coordinating an intelligence and response plan so that your group will have direction and methods for knowing who is coming and what the neighborhoods response to various threats will be.
Resources:
The Prepper’s Blueprint: The Step-By-Step Guide To Help You Through Any Disaster
Prepper’s Home Defense: Security Strategies to Protect Your Family by Any Means Necessary
Contact! A Tactical Manual for Post Collapse Survival
Delivered by The Daily Sheeple
Contributed by Pat Henry of The Prepper Journal.
Thinking About your Neighborhood from a Tactical Perspective
Pat Henry
Fri, 23 Jan 2015 21:00:11 GMT
Chuck Norris battles for abandoned veterans
Because of the skills, training, advanced equipment and, often most importantly, heroic actions of so many other men and women serving in war zones, 92 percent of those service members injured in combat today are surviving even the most severe wounds and injuries. It is the highest percentage in the history of warfare.
In the battle to restore to the highest level possible their quality of life and reintegrate them back into society, we have not been nearly so successful. Current events have offered us a couple of stark reminders of these shortfalls. The first is the release of Clint Eastwood’s powerful new film, “American Sniper,” and its account of the physical and psychological cost paid by our warriors on the front lines, mounting battle scars not necessarily seen by the naked eye.
The next is the advance release this week of a new, shocking analysis to be published in the Annals of Epidemiology that puts a definitively more scientific number to the suicide rate since the start of the recent wars – 29.5 per 100,000 veterans. That is roughly 50 percent higher than the rate among other civilians with similar demographic characteristics. Among veterans in the current study, there was one suicide a day, with the rates highest during a veteran’s first three years out of the military.
Along with the higher rate of survival among military personnel comes an elevated need for finding new ways of managing acute and chronic pain associated with war-injured troops. It is identified by the Department of Veterans Affairs as the most common medical problem in veterans returning over the past decade.
In May 2010, a task force formed by the Army surgeon general issued a report suggesting the military needed a more holistic, multidisciplinary approach to pain management, including complementary and alternative medicine.
The VA and National Institutes of Health’s National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine announced in September that they were dedicating $21.7 million toward research projects exploring non-drug approaches to managing pain and related health conditions, such as post-traumatic stress disorder, drug abuse and sleep issues, calling the development of non-drug options an urgent public health imperative. Among the innovative projects in development is research testing the feasibility of a morning bright light treatment to reduce and help manage chronic lower-back pain and improve PTSD symptoms, mood and sleep in veterans.
Not on the list as yet is hyperbaric oxygen therapy – hard to believe, considering that harnessing the power of oxygen’s healing properties has been done since the 17th century. Given that hyperbaric oxygen therapy delivers oxygen to every cell in the body, it is the definition of a holistic approach. It puts oxygen into oxygen-depleted tissue so these tissues can heal and is considered one of the lowest-risk medical treatments available. It has also been shown to add healing power to existing therapies and make them more effective. It delivers treatment without causing discomfort or pain. It is inexpensive and readily available. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy is said to be the only medical treatment that biologically repairs and regenerates tissue, including brain tissue. Its neurological benefits have long been recorded.
So what gives?
Medical science and surgery have made monumental strides in the effort to save lives in combat. We need to apply equal measure in healing, leaving no option unexplored in advancing the quality of the lives of those saved. How can mainstream medicine continue to turns its back on what could develop into an important complementary therapy?
Despite a lack of major grant funding, efforts to demonstrate the value of hyperbaric oxygen therapy to help U.S. military veterans occasionally happen.
In 2009, the Louisiana State University School of Medicine conducted a pilot trial of hyperbaric oxygen therapy in treating blast-induced chronic traumatic brain injury and PTSD. It represented the first organized body of information to suggest a possible new treatment for conditions that present the greatest challenge to military health care providers.
Symptoms and quality of life in 15 U.S. veterans with blast-induced chronic traumatic brain injury and PTSD were monitored an average of three years after their injuries. All subjects reported symptomatic improvement in the 35-day study period of treatment using hyperbaric oxygen therapy. The participating veterans achieved substantial improvements in memory, concentration, executive function and quality of life and a reduction in headaches, concussion symptoms, depression and anxiety.
This therapeutic approach continues today, supported by private donations through the Oklahoma-based nonprofit Patriot Clinics. This organization has provided more than 6,000 treatments to veterans and others in need since January of last year. The clinic’s goal is to treat 5,000 Oklahoma veterans with hyperbaric oxygen therapy by the end of the year and to see other states follow suit by setting up their own Patriot Clinics network. If you’re interested in donating to support this important work, you can do so at HyperbaricMedicalFoundation.org.
Next week, in the second part of this look at hyperbaric oxygen therapy, I’ll look at the roots of the bias against this form of therapy and the reasons it will be up to us, the public at large, to elevate hyperbaric oxygen therapy to its proper place in the world of health care and to fully tap its potential.
Write to Chuck Norris with your questions about health and fitness. Follow Chuck Norris through his official social media sites, on Twitter @chucknorris and Facebook’s “Official Chuck Norris Page.” He blogs at < a href=”http://chucknorrisnews.blogspot.com”>ChuckNorrisNews.blogspot.com.
Chuck Norris battles for abandoned veterans
Chuck Norris
Fri, 23 Jan 2015 18:11:41 GMT
Video: Daycare worker kicks sleeping toddler
(TAMPA BAY TIMES) NEW PORT RICHEY — After kicking a toddler in the head in an apparent effort to wake her up, a child care employee at Kids Stop-N-Play day care in Holiday was arrested and charged with child abuse, according to the Pasco County Sheriff’s Office.
Sixteen-month-old Lillian Roan was dotted with bruises when her mother picked her up from the day care Saturday afternoon: one underneath her eye, three on her forehead, and a red, bald patch created when the worker kicked her daughter in the head, Lillian’s mother said.
Later that day, Pasco sheriff’s deputies arrested Linda K. Klemm, 48, of Tarpon Springs and charged her with child abuse. She was released on $5,000 bail Sunday.
Video: Daycare worker kicks sleeping toddler
-NO AUTHOR-
Fri, 23 Jan 2015 18:42:31 GMT
Liar And Traitor Al Gore Global Warming Fake Global Warming Climate Change Wants $90 Trillion from you to turn in your cars! What a LUNATIC! | The Daily Caller
Al Gore Global Warming Climate Change $90 Trillion Spending | The Daily Caller
DailyCaller
Al Gore: Spend $90 Trillion To Ban Cars From Every Major City In The World
Daily Caller
Al Gore: Spend $90 Trillion To Ban Cars From Every Major City In The World
11:22 AM 01/23/2015
Former Vice President Al Gore and former Mexican President Felipe Calderon are pushing for $90 trillion in spending to ban cars from every major city in the world and make them more dense.
Gore and Calderon presented a report from the Global Commission on the Economy & Climate (GCEC) and argued that fighting global warming will require making cities more compact and wholly reliant on public transit. This is the only way to make sure urban areas don’t contribute to global warming, the two politicians argued.
Calderon and Gore argued that $90 trillion is going to be spent anyways in the coming decades upgrading cities around the world. They argue that it should be spent on making cities more climate friendly.
“The mistake we made in Mexico was to let cities develop however they want, and it’s a mess,” Calderon told Business Insider.
GCEC’s study says that “more compact, better-connected cities with strong mass transit systems will help policy-makers tackle these pressing challenges. Such cities are more productive, socially inclusive, resilient, cleaner, quieter and safer.”
The study says that 70 percent of the world’s energy-use and greenhouse-gas emissions come from cities. Reducing emissions from ever-growing urban areas will show “that the goals of economic growth and climate change can work together,” according to GCEC.
Calderon and Gore made their presentation at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland where, ironically (or maybe not, at this point), some 1,700 private jets — which use petroleum — were used to shuttle in conference participants and others to discuss global warming and other pressing global issues.
There was such a big influx of air traffic, reports Newsweek, that the Swiss military had to open an air base for the private jets to land. At last year’s meeting in Davos, some 200 helicopters were used to bring in conference-goers.
Gore also used the conference to announce a massive concert to raise awareness about global warming. He and pop star Pharrell Williams are calling it “Live Earth” and it will be staged in six cities across the globe — not exactly a small carbon footprint.
The concert is supposed to build up support for an international climate treaty ahead of the United Nations summit in Paris later this year. Pharrell says he wants to “have humanity harmonize all at once.”
“It is absolutely crucial that we build public will for an agreement,” Gore told World Economic Forum participants. “The purpose is to have a billion voices with one message, to demand climate action now.”
Follow Michael on Twitter
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
Tags: Al Gore, Felipe Calderon, Global Warming, Mexico, Pharrell Williams
DailyCaller
Al Gore: Spend $90 Trillion To Ban Cars From Every Major City In The World
Daily Caller
Al Gore: Spend $90 Trillion To Ban Cars From Every Major City In The World
11:22 AM 01/23/2015
Former Vice President Al Gore and former Mexican President Felipe Calderon are pushing for $90 trillion in spending to ban cars from every major city in the world and make them more dense.
Gore and Calderon presented a report from the Global Commission on the Economy & Climate (GCEC) and argued that fighting global warming will require making cities more compact and wholly reliant on public transit. This is the only way to make sure urban areas don’t contribute to global warming, the two politicians argued.
Calderon and Gore argued that $90 trillion is going to be spent anyways in the coming decades upgrading cities around the world. They argue that it should be spent on making cities more climate friendly.
“The mistake we made in Mexico was to let cities develop however they want, and it’s a mess,” Calderon told Business Insider.
GCEC’s study says that “more compact, better-connected cities with strong mass transit systems will help policy-makers tackle these pressing challenges. Such cities are more productive, socially inclusive, resilient, cleaner, quieter and safer.”
The study says that 70 percent of the world’s energy-use and greenhouse-gas emissions come from cities. Reducing emissions from ever-growing urban areas will show “that the goals of economic growth and climate change can work together,” according to GCEC.
Calderon and Gore made their presentation at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland where, ironically (or maybe not, at this point), some 1,700 private jets — which use petroleum — were used to shuttle in conference participants and others to discuss global warming and other pressing global issues.
There was such a big influx of air traffic, reports Newsweek, that the Swiss military had to open an air base for the private jets to land. At last year’s meeting in Davos, some 200 helicopters were used to bring in conference-goers.
Gore also used the conference to announce a massive concert to raise awareness about global warming. He and pop star Pharrell Williams are calling it “Live Earth” and it will be staged in six cities across the globe — not exactly a small carbon footprint.
The concert is supposed to build up support for an international climate treaty ahead of the United Nations summit in Paris later this year. Pharrell says he wants to “have humanity harmonize all at once.”
“It is absolutely crucial that we build public will for an agreement,” Gore told World Economic Forum participants. “The purpose is to have a billion voices with one message, to demand climate action now.”
Follow Michael on Twitter
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
Tags: Al Gore, Felipe Calderon, Global Warming, Mexico, Pharrell Williams
The first place to cut government spending
It never ceases to amaze me that politically active people that know the reality of income inequality, a minimum wage whose recipients average age is 34 supporting a family and a tax code that benefits the very rich. They support the concept that it’s OK that 80 people worldwide have as much wealth a 3.5 billion people, half the world population.
They buy favorable tax laws from corrupt government officials and use illogical reasoning like, raising taxes on them will lead to raising tax on all of us. They defend those 1 percent from paying at least the same percentage of income as the rest of us. Why?
The propaganda combined with anti-immigrant and racial bias leads to the absurd conclusion that we can’t ask them to pay more, and that we are just one step away from being as rich as them, and if we make them pay a fair share, they will come for us next to pay more.
Cut spending is their cry. Well, I agree we should, and the best place to start is the largest cost to government. Defense. We still make ships and aircraft the military does not want or need. They build these wasteful items in districts that get support from elected officials. We are officially a banana republic.
Norm Stewart
The first place to cut government spending
-NO AUTHOR-
Fri, 23 Jan 2015 19:50:41 GMT
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)