What Are the Issues?

V: Energy Independence! Help Make Freedom From Oil a Reality

2008-06-27T17:07:00.007-07:00

Have hope for a brighter future! Sometimes GOOD things DO happen. Here's to free enterprise, collaboration, and human genius and innovation.

We need energy solutions, and face it, we can't depend on the government and big business to bring them to us. Government and corporate interests have actively suppressed development and utilization of new technologies. Low cost, sustainable, and renewable energy technologies have existed for many decades, yet we remain absolutely dependent on fossil fuels. As gasoline prices skyrocket, our society is effectively crippled.

(By the way, oil prices are intentionally manipulated. None of the reasons we are fed for oil price inflation are the reality of what is happening. It goes way beyond the oil companies. You and I are just pawns in a global money game. If we were to develop no-cost energy systems, their HUGE PROFITS would evaporate. They just can't let that happen, so they suppress the emergence of new technologies.)

It's up to US to make this a reality. We CAN do it. What this requires is organization and cooperation, joining our individual efforts together to accomplish otherwise imposing tasks. Fortunately for us, and for the whole world, a non-profit organization has already been created, specifically for this purpose.

Because this organization combines the efforts and intentions of many individuals worldwide, it will be much more difficult for profit-seeking corporate interests to keep us held down. We WILL have sustainable energy.

(This is being done by individual people intentionally gathering together into a non-profit organization for beneficial purposes. This does NOT depend on large established international organizations or on treaties, and it creates NO international treaties or obligations. Therefore it will have no negative impact on U.S. sovereignty. Ultimately, by ending our dependence on foreign oil, this dramatically increases our freedom. And eventually, the technologies developed will be provided at little to no cost to societies around the world who need free, low-impact energy production.)

I watched the videos on The Orion Project's website. They are terrific. Dr. Steven Greer says we can have sustainable energy production within a year. They are already making significant progress.

Watch these videos! Tell other people! Click on the newsletters below to get to their website.

http://www.theorionproject.org/en/video.html

An Introduction to The Orion Project

The Orion Project Scientists

The Breakthrough Campaign

The Transition

CONTRIBUTE TO THE ORION PROJECT.
It is public contributions that will make this a reality. Your investment today will soon pay off with FREE energy forever.

Because Dr. Steven Greer of The Orion Project says it better than I do, I'm pasting in two of their newsletters in their entirety. Click on the newsletters to get to their website.
Sandra

The Orion Project

Renewable Energy

Free for Everyone!

Imminent scientific breakthroughs will eliminate your monthly energy bills (and the world's) FOR LIFE!

(Keep reading to learn how YOU can be a part of this exciting opportunity!)

Dear Friends:

IMAGINE a device that could produce every watt of energy your home will ever need.

IMAGINE this device being CLEANER than solar power, but as free as the air you breath!

IMAGINE no more dependence on oil reserves run by cartels in foreign lands.

IMAGINE no more nuclear waste or stripping of the countryside for coal.

And finally...

IMAGINE this device being available EVERYWHERE on the planet: from the apartments of NYC, to the desert communities in Africa, and even to your favorite camping destination...

"Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited, whereas imagination embraces the entire world, stimulating progress, giving birth to evolution." - Albert Einstein

But do not confuse these exciting possibilities with mere wishful thinking. These are very REAL technologies that exist RIGHT NOW! What needs to be done is to quickly develop these technologies into actual products you can buy at a local store, allowing you to unplug from high monthly bills and unsustainable, polluting utilities.

Many of you know I have been working together with scientists, inventors and leaders in society to advance a new, clean technology energy system for 17 years. My vision for The Orion Project is to provide free renewable energy for everyone. We're getting so close to a solution, and I need your help today.

So how can YOU be a part of this?

DONATE NOW to join us on this incredible endeavor!

SPREAD THE WORD by forwarding this note to 10 others!

Your donation of $30 or more will make a huge difference.
Referring 10 friends will help us reach our goal of $3 Million in a very short time.

We currently have 6 different technologies under development. Any of them is potentially "the one" that will be the breakthrough we need. Once we have rigorously verified the results, it's a straight sprint to optimization and production. But, this is currently being done on a shoestring budget! To make this occur in 12-18 months versus 12-18 years, we need to be able to bring these scientists together. And, we need to give them the necessary tools and assistance to develop multiple technologies that will provide free energy perpetually for all people.

Imagine $10/gallon in less than 5 years.

Imagine having to forego heating in the winter or A/C in the summer.

Imagine familities having to decide between eating and being able to drive miles away to work.

Imagine having more and more pollution in the water, in the air, in your food, everywhere...

It's not a pretty future... that is why we need you now to generously donate as much as you can to develop these new technologies as quickly as humanly possible!

Cleaner than solar energy, but as free as the air you breath!

Do not delay! Share this message with ten others, and Donate today and as generously as you can afford! $30 or more makes a huge difference in our future. We soon shall stand at the finish line with our device in hand.

Toward a more sustainable and equitable future for all.

PS. Your donation is tax-deductible!

"Energy Cleaner Than Solar, And As Free As The Air"

Our campaign needs you and your help. In order to bring an alternative energy device into your home or place of business, The Orion Project needs funding to build a prototype, test it and manufacture it. When you donate a small amount (even $30 makes a huge difference), we promise that 100% of your contribution goes directly to the development of an alternative energy device.

DONATE NOW

In addition to making a tax-deductible contribution, The Orion Project Team asks that you introduce us, and Dr. Greer's vision of a renewable energy device, to 10 friends and family members who are passionate about a cleaner, less expensive energy source.

REFER A FRIEND

We appreciate your support and interest and thank you for spreading the word of our efforts to others. We will share our progress on this, and other projects under development, in future newsletters. Do you know of a scientist or inventor whose focus is on alternative energy solutions? Please let us know. The Orion Project Team

Inventor Shares Energy Prototype with The Orion Project (TOP)

Mr. Bill Costantino and Dr. Ted Loder of TOP just recently had the opportunity to meet with an inventor who presented a wide range of possible technologies and prototype samples that may be capable of producing clean and sustainable electric power - without using polluting fossil fuels. If such a breakthrough is indeed possible, TOP expects to have actual data from preliminary tests within 2-3 months! (To read the full article, please click on Cutting Edge Inven tor ).

We Hope You Can Imagine a Future Where Everyone - Rich or Poor - Can Have Clean, Free Energy

The technology is just around the corner. Let your imagination reach higher limits. We can move from imagination to reality.

Reality is just 1-2-3 steps away:

Refer 10 friends to The Orion Project. Your contact information will never be sold or exchanged:

1. REFER TEN FRIENDS

Donate what you can, but $30 or more makes a HUGE difference:

2. DONATE NOW

Sign up for our newsletter and breaking news about the Orion Project on our website:

3. FREE NEWSLETTER

Upcoming Lectures & Conferences

Dr. Greer will be speaking at the IIIHS Conference scheduled for July 11-20, 2008. Please check the conference website for more information.

July 4, 2008

Celebrate Freedom
Why The Orion Project?
Why now?

Dear Friends and Supporters:

People keep coming on board and supporting our vision of free energy. However there are many others that hesitate and have some concerns. We hope to alleviate them here. The two dominant questions that we face are: Why The Orion Project? And, why now? We hope that in sharing our vision with you that you will have faith in our commitment and ability to achieve what the world has longed for... cheap, clean, renewable energy accessible everywhere in the world.

But before we do that, we want to reiterate to you that we are not "all talk and no action". While The Orion Project core team is running our Breakthrough Campaign to make our vision possible, our inventors continue to plug away and make great strides on their particular devices. To demonstrate our continued progress, here is another update on the Mr. Q. PMG device.

Mr. Q. and Mr. P. Continue to Approach Over-Unity

Against some fairly tough barriers (limited budget, employment limitations, and travel distance), we currently have to plan our experiments and run them continuously for as many hours as they can stay awake. Nevertheless, these 2 ambitious and determined inventors continue to make significant and necessary optimizations and get better results with each trip. Their most recent research week was June 23-27. Details of this research week will be available soon. For those interested in the full update on their first research week, please read the exciting details on our Latest News web page.

It should be noted that this particular group (the PMG group with Mr. Q. and Mr. P.) is working on a shoestring budget, which is graciously supported by a single angel investor of limited financial resources. The mere fact that we have gotten this far on so little is, again, a testament to the dedication and desire of all parties involved in bringing this project to fruition. Once we achieve our Breakthrough Campaign and can bring these inventors under one roof in a modern facility, the results of this and our other groups will be vastly accelerated and turbo-charged.

To help us move past a shoestring budget, please consider a donation to The Orion Project. Your donation is tax deductible.

Our Vision

Currently, our Pulsed Motor Generator inventors need to cram 4 round-the-clock workdays in a row every 3-4 weeks when we have the financial ability to bring them together. This isn't exactly an ideal way to do any job, but we will continue to move forward in anyway we can while waiting for a successful donation campaign. But to give you a taste of what would be possible when we are successful, I'd like you to imagine how much faster, better, and more successful we'll be with the following:

Imagine

Imagine bringing all of our projects under a single roof... from garages into a modern facility with adequate floor space.

Imagine each scientist being able to work on these devices full time, rather than averaging 2-10 hours a week because of other employment.

Imagine these inventors being able to match skill sets, greatly complementing each other's weaknesses and strengths to achieve FAR MORE together than they ever could individually.

Imagine being able to get up and running after Mr. Q.'s anomalous event (see previous article) in a matter of hours rather than a month.

Imagine being able to brainstorm with other brilliant inventors in real time, on-site, with proper equipment, space, availability of parts.

Why The Orion Project? Why Now?

So I ask our readers... wouldn't we be more likely to succeed? And in a much shorter timeframe? Wouldn't this help us get working prototypes of these devices to independent testers to verify we have in fact succeeded? Wouldn't this ultimately accelerate the timeframe in getting these devices to you so you can stop paying $4+ dollars a gallon for a fuel that is finite? We believe so, and we are commited to our vision.

Others have failed before us because they lacked funding, matching skill sets, the ability to take a working device and get it into production. We have expertise at all of these levels and our Breakthrough Campaign will help bring these experts together for the sole purpose of seeing this project through, beginning to end, to give us the best chance of succeeding.

And the progress will only accelerate with each new substantial discovery and with each stage of the process that we achieve. Right now we have promising results, but we do not personally have a device going over-unity. Once we do and have lab-certified results, we can begin making media announcements and begin to pull in even larger donors and investors as they begin to see the light at the end of the tunnel. But we need to get to that point first! And that is why we have created a lean and straightforward Breakthrough Campaign to get us to and through these first critical stages.

What will it take?

To make this vision happen, we need your help to achieve a critical level of funding in order to support our inventors with employment and a laboratory facility for 12-18 months. We cannot begin implementing this until we have the entire budget in hand, lest we get caught without the funds to complete the task within a limited window of opportunity.

PLEASE DONATE TODAY

There is one more way you can help. It's critical that this thermometer rise quickly. Please pass this email along to 10 of your friends and family who share our concern. Encourage each one to do the same... exponentially, we will become a community working toward a common goal.

Thank You

I cannot thank the donors enough for their very generous contributions, many of whom are donating well above our minimum request. It humbles me and the rest of The Orion Project team to know that you are putting your faith in us to deliver on our promise. That is our promise to develop at least one free energy device that can be the key to eliminating high energy costs, environmental damage, and the political struggles associated with the world's energy crises. To do this, we are asking for a meager $3 million to do what NO other energy program will ever achieve with annual budgets that can be THOUSANDS of times larger per year!

We at The Orion Project certainly understand the tough economic situation that many are faced with. However, that problem will only get worse if we do not break free from these old paths and paradigms. We hope that others among you will continue to pass our message and our vision to others as well as also donate to our cause so that we can bring about this change in 6-18 months vs. 6-18 years.

If you can, please donate today to help us, help you, help the world...

Toward a more sustainable future for all of mankind.

Dr. Steven Greer
www.theorionproject.org
Join our mailing list!

V: Global Warming News & Updates

2008-06-27T17:07:00.005-07:00

Here we have extensive information about global warming and climate change. Over the course of many years, my mother has gathered this information from numerous sources. Climate change really is a huge group of issues that we must start taking action to resolve. The future of life on our planet is at stake.

I have not modified this material to make it easily read on the blog. I've been short on time. Please accept my apologies.
Sandra

Global Warming News & Updates
by Carolyn Lee, July 2008

Have you read the studies and reports I recommended in my previous post, "Is Global Warming for Real?" http://whataretheissues2008.blogspot.com/2008/05/is-global-warming-for-real.html If you haven't read them yet please take the time to do so, because global warming is going to impact your life whether you like it or not. Burying your head in the sand is not going to save you from its consequences. Only an informed populace can know what actions to take to get us out of this mess that we have created for ourselves and the planet. There is no more important issue facing us at this particular moment in time, but you can't know that in your heart until you have read the research for yourself.

Unfortunately our own government has been the most culpable in hiding the truth of global warming from its citizens. As you have read elsewhere at this blog, our republic has morphed into a very fascist-type state, where the government serves the interests of large, moneyed corporations and not the people whom they are elected to serve. Our government protects the turf of fossil fuel-related corporations with a vengeance and blocks public access to clean energy technologies. It has therefore been an enormous contributor to the greenhouse gas problem for many, many years. As they are a part of the problem, how can we possibly expect them to help solve it? The answer is pretty obvious. They won't!

This is really sad because we have some of the brightest and most innovative thinkers on the planet living right here in the United States. What a waste! A waste of talent and a terrible, criminal waste of precious time.

The Orion Project

But there's hope, as a new non-profit has now been formed to bring many great minds together to help solve our energy problems without government involvement. It's called The Orion Project. Go to http://whataretheissues2008.blogspot.com/2008/06/energy-independence-help-make-freedom.html and learn about The Orion Project and over-unity energy technology. Donate everything you can, then please help t o spread the word to friends, relatives, and business associates worldwide. Here is something we can all do that can really make a difference! Help to mitigate the damage that we have caused to our home. Help to keep the situation from becoming truly catastrophic. Help to create a brighter future for the earth and future generations.

Soil Carbon Sequestration

Have you heard about soil carbon sequestration? It turns out that proper land use practices can return the excess CO2 we have released into the atmosphere back into the ground where it belongs and quickly! Read about it at http://whataretheissues2008.blogspot.com/2008/05/putting-carbon-back-where-it-belongs-in.html. Be sure to watch the fantastic slide presentation. A picture is worth a thousand words.

Then go to three postings on this blog to learn what types of agriculture contribute to the global warming problem and which ones help to reduce it.

http://whataretheissues2008.blogspot.com/2008/05/un-blames-cows-for-global-warming.html, http://whataretheissues2008.blogspot.com/2008/05/reversing-global-climate-change-with.html and http://whataretheissues2008.blogspot.com/2008/05/grassfarming-can-help-to-reverse-global.html

Of course, at the local level, it is important to support farmers who employ these types of practices. That goes without saying. But much more needs to be done, as hardly anyone has heard of soil carbon sequestration. The whole world has spent years wrangling over carbon caps, carbon trading, and carbon taxes...while ignoring one of the most natural, least expensive, and healthiest solutions of all! So you can really help by sending this information on.

The data about global warming is constantly changing. Thousands of scientists around the world are studying hundreds of aspects of the problem. The most recent findings are announced and posted at http://www.climateark.org/ whenever a new scientific paper is published. It's incredible, and rather frightening, that changes are happening so rapidly. Things that were not expected to occur for decades or even centuries are happening right now. Here are some of the latest findings. Updates will be added periodically. Click on links to access the original posts. Some sites have related videos, so watch for them.

Stay informed!!

Too Much CO2!!

(note: Until you read the reports and studies I referred to earlier you can't really grasp the significance of these numbers.)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/may/13/carbonemissions.climatechange

World carbon dioxide levels highest for 650,000 years, says US report

7 Rise in chief greenhouse gas worse than feared
7 Earth may be losing ability to absorb CO2, say scientists

http://www.andhranews.net/Technology/2008/June/28-World-might-51665.asp

World might have already reached the tipping point of climate change

Washington, June 28 : Climate experts have warned that the world might have already reached the tipping point of climate change, where immediate actions needed to be done to reduce the effects of global warming.

http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174930

Tomgram: Bill McKibben, The Defining Moment for Climate Change

Already climate change -- in the form of a changing pattern of global rainfall -- seems to be affecting the planet in significant ways. Take the massive, almost decade-long drought in Australia's wheat-growing heartland, which has been a significant factor in sending flour prices, and so bread prices, soaring globally, leading to desperation and food riots across the planet.

A report from the Bureau of Meteorology in Australia makes clear that, despite recent heavy rains in the eastern Australian breadbasket, years of above normal rainfall would be needed "to remove the very long-term [water] deficits" in the region. The report then adds this ominous note: "The combination of record heat and widespread drought during the past five to 10 years over large parts of southern and eastern Australia is without historical precedent and is, at least partly, a result of climate change."

Think a bit about that phrase -- "without historical precedent."

It's Not Just CO2!

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/04/080423181652.htm

Greenhouse Gases, Carbon Dioxide And Methane, Rise Sharply in 2007

ScienceDaily (Apr. 24, 2008) Last year alone global levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, the primary driver of global climate change, increased by 0.6 percent, or 19 billion tons. Additionally methane rose by 27 million tons after nearly a decade with little or no increase. NOAA scientists released these and other preliminary findings today as part of an annual update to the agencys greenhouse gas index, which tracks data from 60 sites around the

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_potential

Global warming potential

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Global warming potential (GWP) is a measure of how much a given mass of greenhouse gas is estimated to contribute to global warming. It is a relative scale which compares the gas in question to that of the same mass of carbon dioxide (whose GWP is by definition 1). A GWP is calculated over a specific time interval and the value of this must be stated whenever a GWP is quoted or else the value is meaningless.

Importance of time horizon

Note that a substance's GWP depends on the timespan over which the potential is calculated. A gas which is quickly removed from the atmosphere may initially have a large effect but for longer time periods as it has been removed becomes less important. Thus methane has a potential of 25 over 100 years but 72 over 20 years; conversely sulfur hexafluoride has a GWP of 22,800 over 100 years but 16,300 over 20 years (IPCC TAR). The GWP value depends on how the gas concentration decays over time in the atmosphere. This is often not precisely known and hence the values should not be considered exact. For this reason when quoting a GWP it is important to give a reference to the calculation.

The GWP for a mixture of gases can not be determined from the GWP of the constituent gases by any form of simple linear addition.

Generally, it is by regulators (i.e. CARB) the time horizon of 100 years.

Values

Carbon dioxide has a GWP of exactly 1 (since it is the baseline unit to which all other greenhouse gases are compared).

GWP values and lifetimes from 2007 IPCC AR4 [3] (2001 IPCC TAR [4] in brackets)	Lifetime - years	GWP time horizon
	Lifetime - years	20 years	100 years	500 years
Methane	12 (12)	72 (62)	25 (23)	7.6 (7)
Nitrous oxide	114 (114)	310 (275)	298 (296)	153 (156)
HFC-23 (hydrofluorocarbon)	270 (260)	12,000 (9400)	14,800 (12000)	12,200 (10000)
HFC-134a (hydrofluorocarbon)	14 (13.8)	3830 (3300)	1430 (1300)	435 (400)
sulfur hexafluoride	3200 (3200)	16,300 (15100)	22,800 (22200)	32,600 (32400)

A GWP is not usually calculated for water vapour. Water vapour has a significant influence with regard to absorbing IR-radiation; however its concentration in the atmosphere mainly depends on air temperature. As there is no possibility to directly influence atmospheric water vapour concentration, the GWP-level for water vapour is not calculated; see greenhouse gas.

The substances subject to restrictions in the Kyoto protocol either are rapidly increasing their concentrations in Earth's atmosphere or have a large GWP.

The GWP depends on the following factors:

the absorption of infrared radiation by a given species
the spectral location of its absorbing wavelengths
the atmospheric lifetime of the species

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_equivalent

Equivalent carbon dioxide

Equivalent CO₂ (CO₂e) is the concentration of CO₂ that would cause the same level of radiative forcing as a given type and concentration of greenhouse gas. Examples of such greenhouse gases are methane, perfluorocarbons and nitrous oxide. CO₂e is expressed as parts per million by volume, ppmv.

CO₂e calculation example:

The radiative forcing for pure CO₂ is approximated by $R F = a l n (C / C 0)$ where C is the present concentration, $a$ is a constant, 5.35 and $C 0$ the pre-industrial concentration, 278 ppm. Hence the value of CO₂e for an arbitrary gas mixture with a known radiative forcing is given by $C 0 e x p (R F / a)$ in ppmv.
To calculate the radiative forcing for a 1998 gas mixture, IPCC 2001 gives the radiative forcing (relative to 1750) of various gases as: CO₂=1.46 (corresponding to a concentration of 365 ppmv), CH₄=0.48, N₂O=0.15 and other minor gases =0.01 W/m2. The sum of these is 2.10 W/m2. Inserting this to the above formula, we obtain CO₂e = 412 ppmv.

Carbon dioxide equivalent

Carbon dioxide equivalency is a quantity that describes, for a given mixture and amount of greenhouse gas, the amount of CO₂ that would have the same global warming potential (GWP), when measured over a specified timescale (generally, 100 years). Carbon dioxide equivalency thus reflects the time-integrated radiative forcing, rather than the instantaneous value described by CO₂e.

The carbon dioxide equivalency for a gas is obtained by multiplying the mass and the GWP of the gas. The following units are commonly used:

By the UN climate change panel IPCC: billion metric tonnes of CO₂ equivalent (GtCO₂eq).
In industry: million metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents (MMTCDE).
For vehicles: g of carbon dioxide equivalents / km (gCDE/km).

For example, the GWP for methane is 21 and for nitrous oxide 310. This means that emissions of 1 million metric tonnes of methane and nitrous oxide respectively is equivalent to emissions of 21 and 310 million metric tonnes of carbon dioxide.

Unpredictable Weather!

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080619175522.htm

Expect More Droughts, Heavy Downpours, Excessive Heat, And Intense Hurricanes Due To Global Warming, NOAA

ScienceDaily (June 20, 2008) The U.S. Climate Change Science Program and the Subcommittee on Global Change Research has released a scientific assessment that provides the first comprehensive analysis of observed and projected changes in weather and climate extremes in North America and U.S. territories. Among the major findings reported in this assessment are that droughts, heavy downpours, excessive heat, and intense hurricanes are likely to become more commonplace as humans continue to increase the atmospheric concentrations of heat-trapping greenhouse gases.

Food and Water Shortages!

(note: see The Oceans)

http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=94778

Melting glaciers start countdown to climate chaos

Source: Copyright 2008, Observer
Date: March 16, 2008
Byline: Juliette Jowit

For centuries, writers, painters and photographers have been drawn to the wild and seemingly indestructible beauty of glaciers. More practically, they are a vital part of the planet's system for collecting, storing and delivering the fresh water that billions of people depend on for washing, drinking, agriculture and power. Now these once indomitable monuments are disappearing. And as they retreat, glacial lakes will burst, debris and ice will fall in avalanches, rivers will flood and then dry up, and sea levels will rise even further, say the climate experts. Communities will be deprived of essential water, crops will be ruined and power stations which rely on river flows paralysed.

http://africa.reuters.com/wire/news/usnL14573335.html

Melting mountains a "time bomb" for water shortages

Tue 15 Apr 2008, 8:00 GMT

(Corrects name of hydrologist in paragraphs 2, 6 and 15 in story issued on April 14)

By Sylvia Westall

VIENNA, April 15 (Reuters) - Glaciers and mountain snow are melting earlier in the year than usual, meaning the water has already gone when millions of people need it during the summer when rainfall is lower, scientists warned on Monday.

"This is just a time bomb," said hydrologist Carmen de Jong at a meeting of geoscientists in Vienna.

Those areas most at risk from a lack of water for drinking and agriculture include parts of the Middle East, southern Africa, the United States, South America and the Mediterranean.

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/apr2008/2008-04-28-01.asp

Melting Andean Glaciers Could Leave 30 Million High and Dry

WASHINGTON, DC, April 28, 2008 (ENS) - About 99 percent of the Chacaltaya glacier in Bolivia has disappeared since 1940, says World Bank engineer Walter Vergara, in his new report, "The Impacts of Climate Change in Latin America."

One of the highest glaciers in South America, Chacaltaya is one of the first glaciers to melt due to climate change. Although the glacier is over 18,000 years old, it is expected to vanish this year.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-ichfish15-2008jun15,0,587682.story

Alaska Salmon May Bear Scars of Global Warming

By Kenneth R. Weiss, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
June 15, 2008

TANANA, ALASKA -- With a sickening thud, another hefty and handsome salmon lands in the waste barrel, headed for the dogs.

"See, it's all of the biggest, best-looking fish," said Pat Moore, waving a stogie at the pile of discards. "It breaks my heart. My dogs cannot eat all that. The maggots will get them first."

More Alaskan salmon caught here end up in the dog pot these days, their orange-pink flesh fouled by disease that scientists have correlated with warmer water in the Yukon River.

The sorting of winners and losers at Moore's riverbank fish camp illustrates what scientists have been predicting will accompany global warming: Cold-temperature barriers are giving way, allowing parasites, bacteria and other disease-spreading organisms to move toward higher latitudes.

& amp; amp; amp; amp; amp; lt; WMFILTERED id=WNVideoScript wmfiltered="http://content.worldnow.com/global/tools/video/WNVideoWidgets.js?ver=20080501" type="text/javascript">

Lifeforms and Biodiversity:

(note: These first two articles portend absolutely disastrous consequences for the world's tropical forests and with only the slightest rise in temperature. This is really alarming!)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/insects-will-be-climate-changes-first-victims-821616.html

Insects 'will be climate change's first victims'

By Steve Connor, Science Editor
Tuesday, 6 May 2008

Tropical insects rather than polar bears could be among the first species to become extinct as a result of global warming, a study has found.

Insects in the tropics are already living at the limit of their temperature range and any further increases could quickly kill them off with huge repercussions for tropical habitats, which rely on insects for everything from pollination to waste disposal. Scientists have found that a rise in average temperatures in the tropics of just 1C or 2C could be enough to exert a significant and harmful effect on the survival of a wide variety of important insects.

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=tropical-insects-may-not-thrive-in-warming-world

May 6, 2008 in Earth & Environment

Toasted Bugs? Tropical Insects May Not Thrive in Warming World

Although insects, frogs, lizards and turtles in the tropics are used to hot weather, climate change may prove too much for many species

By David Biello

BYE BYE BEETLE: This leaf beetle, which lives in the cloud forest in the Ecuadorean Andes, may find future condtions too warm--or dry--for it to thrive.
)KIMBERLY SHELDON, UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON

Global warming may prove worse for insectsand other cold-blooded crittersliving in the steamy tropics than for their counterparts living closer to the frigid polar regions, according to a new study in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA. Even though climate change is likely to affect areas near the poles, tropical insects are already living in conditions that verge on being too hot for them, which means they could be teetering on the edge of extinction.

http://www.ecoearth.info/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=96331

Australia: Koalas may be threatened as climate change makes leaves inedible

Source: Copyright 2008, Asia News International
Date: April 6, 2008
Original URL

A new research has indicated that Koalas and other leaf-eating animals may be threatened because of climate change causing eucalyptus leaves to become inedible.

The research, carried out in Australia, saw eucalyptus leaves, which are the staple diet of Koalas, turning to leather. Koalas and greater gliders depend entirely on eucalyptus leaves for food, while some other marsupials, including brushtail and ringtail possums and many wallaby species, feed extensively on the leaves.

http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSN14494485

Giant study pinpoints changes from climate warming

Wed May 14, 2008 1:00pm EDT

By Deborah Zabarenko, Environment Correspondent

WASHINGTON, May 14 (Reuters) - Human-generated climate change made flowers bloom sooner and autumn leaves fall later, turned some polar bears into cannibals and some birds into early breeders, a vast global study reported on Wednesday.

Forests and Rainforests:

http://abcnews.go.com/International/WireStory?id=4232909&page=1

Rain Forests Fall at 'Alarming' Rate

Forests Besieged: With Africa Ahead, World Fells Trees at 'Alarming' Rate, Imperiling Climate

By EDWARD HARRIS Associated Press Writer
ABO EBAM, Nigeria February 3, 2008 (AP)

The Associated Press

In the gloomy shade deep in Africa's rain forest, the noontime silence was pierced by the whine of a far-off chain saw. It was the sound of destruction, echoed from wood to wood, continent to continent, in the tropical belt that circles the globe.

http://www.onearth.org/article/the-giving-trees

The Giving Trees

by Sharon Levy

ISSUE: Spring 2008, feature stories | February 29, 2008

Click for full-size image New science explains how forests could help save us from global warming. Oksana Badrak

For some people forests are measured in board-feet of lumber. For others they're a source of spiritual renewal. But scientists are finding that protecting ancient trees could also be an important new strategy in the fight against global warming.

The Oceans:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080217102140.htm

Climate Change Has Major Impact On Oceans

ScienceDaily (Feb. 24, 2008) Climate change is rapidly transforming the world's oceans by increasing the temperature and acidity of seawater, and altering atmospheric and oceanic circulation, reported a panel of scientists at the American Association for the Advancement of Science annual meeting in Boston.

"The vastness of our oceans may have engendered a sense of complacency about potential impacts from global climate change," said Jane Lubchenco, the Wayne and Gladys Valley Chair of Marine Biology at Oregon State University, who moderated the panel. "The world's oceans are undergoing profound physical, chemical and biological changes whose impacts are just beginning to be felt."

Panelist Gretchen Hofmann, a molecular physiologist at the University of California, Santa Barbara, describes the situation as "multiple jeopardy."

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/05/080521105251.htm

Ocean Acidification: Another Undesired Side Effect of Fossil Fuel-burning

ScienceDaily (May 24, 2008) Up to now, the oceans have buffered climate change considerably by absorbing almost one third of the worldwide emitted carbon dioxide. The oceans represent a significant carbon sink, but the uptake of excess CO₂ stemming from man's burning of fossil fuels comes at a high cost: ocean acidification.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2004431933_webacidocean22m.html

Acidified ocean water rising up nearly 100 years earlier than scientists predicted

By Sandi Doughton

Seattle Times science reporter

Climate models predicted it wouldn't happen until the end of the century.

So Seattle researchers were stunned to discover that vast swaths of acidified sea water are already showing up along the Pacific Coast as carbon dioxide from power plants, cars and factories mixes into the ocean.

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=43114

CLIMATE CHANGE: Corals Collapsing in More Acid Oceans
By Stephen Leahy

Coral reefs like this one could be gone by 2050 due to ocean acidification from global warming.

Credit:Chuck Savall

FORT LAUDERDALE, U.S., Jul 8 (IPS) - Coral reefs need to be put on "life support" if they are to survive climate change, but their ultimate survival is dependant on major reductions in fossil fuel emissions, say experts.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23970127-11949,00.html

No credit as oceans turn sour

Anthony Bergin and Ross Allen | July 05, 2008

NOW that Ross Garnaut's draft report has been released, most of the climate change debate in Australia will focus on the economic effects of any emissions trading scheme.

However, there's another carbon problem, which will profoundly affect our oceans, that has received scant attention beyond a small band of marine scientists and is largely independent of global warming.

The public, aware of the role of carbon dioxide in climate change, doesn't know of its function in acidifying the oceans and the hundreds of years that would be required for recovery.

Ocean acidification refers to the natural process whereby carbon dioxide dissolves in the sea, forming a weak carbonic acid. The ocean is a major sink for atmospheric carbon dioxide and has absorbed about 48 per cent of the CO2 emitted by human activities since the pre-industrial age.

A recent report from the Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems Co-operative Research Centre claimed that carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is at its highest level in 650,000 years, and possibly 23 million years, and half has been dissolved in the oceans, making them more acidic.

The Arctic:

(note: Read The big Melt: Lessons from the Arctic Summer of 2007 for an in-depth understanding of what is happening in the far north. http://www.carbonequity.info/docs/arctic.html)

http://uk.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUKN1822988120080318

NASA data shows thickest and oldest Arctic ice is melting

Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:45pm GMT

By Deborah Zabarenko, Environment Correspondent

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The thickest, oldest and toughest sea ice around the North Pole is melting, a bad sign for the future of the Arctic ice cap, NASA satellite data showed on Tuesday.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/north/story/2008/04/16/arctic-ice.html

Cracks in Arctic ice shelves even worse than feared: scientist

Last Updated: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 | 4:08 PM CT CBC News

Polar ice researchers who teamed up with Canadian Rangers on a patrol around Ellesmere Island this month say they've found that cracks in ice shelves are worse than they originally thought.

Permafrost and Methane:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,547976,00.html

A Storehouse of Greenhouse Gases Is Opening in Siberia

By Volker Mrasek

Researchers have found alarming evidence that the frozen Arctic floor has started to thaw and release long-stored methane gas. The results could be a catastrophic warming of the earth, since methane is a far more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. But can the methane also be used as fuel?

It's always been a disturbing what-if scenario for climate researchers: Gas hydrates stored in the Arctic ocean floor -- hard clumps of ice and methane, conserved by freezing temperatures and high pressure -- could grow unstable and release massive amounts of methane into the atmosphere. Since methane is a potent greenhouse gas, more worrisome than carbon dioxide, the result would be a drastic acceleration of global warming. Until now this idea was mostly academic; scientists had warned that such a thing could happen. Now it seems more likely that it will.

http://www.innovations-report.de/html/berichte/geowissenschaften/bericht-111171.html

Large methane release could cause abrupt climate change as happened 635 million years ago

30.05.2008

An abrupt release of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas, about 635 million years ago from ice sheets that then extended to Earths low latitudes caused a dramatic shift in climate, triggering a series of events that resulted in global warming and effectively ended the last snowball ice age, a UC Riverside-led study reports.

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/arctic-thaw-threatens-siberian-permafrost-846951.html

Arctic thaw threatens Siberian permafrost

By Steve Connor, Science Editor
Saturday, 14 June 2008

The permafrost belt stretching across Siberia to Alaska and Canada could start melting three times faster than expected because of the speed at which Arctic Sea ice is disappearing.

http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/49255/story.htm

Global Warming Will Push Russia to Destruction - WWF

RUSSIA: July 9, 2008

MOSCOW - Global warming will sow destruction across Russia and ex-Soviet states, a report said on Tuesday after the world's richest countries issued targets on harmful emissions that environmentalists criticised as too soft.

The 52-page report -- written by green group WWF and British charity Oxfam -- described a grim picture of social, ecological and economic collapse in the world's biggest country and its former empire unless the world took urgent action.

The Antarctic:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,540059,00.html

New Research Confirms Antarctic Thaw Fears

By Markus Becker

New research confirms that ice sheets in West Antarctica are thinning at a far faster rate than in past millennia. Although scientists are divided as to the cause of the melt, many feel it is directly related to climate change.

The boom must have been deafening last fall as the gigantic chunk of ice finally broke off from the Pine Island Glacier in Antarctica. For almost a year, the creaks and groans from the river of ice had presaged the birth of a new, expansive iceberg. And finally it was there -- 34 kilometers long by 20 kilometers wide, an area almost as great as that of New York City.

http://www.reuters.com/article/reutersEdge/idUSN1462532420080314

Antarctic glacier melted more quickly last year

Fri Mar 14, 2008 1:19pm EDT

By Karina Grazina

MARAMBIO BASE, Antarctica (Reuters) - A glacier used as a benchmark to measure global warming's impact on the Antarctic Peninsula melted more than usual in the past year, according to an Argentine glacier researcher.

For more than 20 years, Pedro Skvarca has studied the Devil's Bay glacier on Vega Island off the Antarctic Peninsula, a part of Antarctica that is warming five times faster than the average in the rest of the world.

The whole of Antarctica holds enough ice and snow to raise world sea levels by 187 feet if it all melted over thousands of years, according to U.N. data.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKN2529744920080326

Slab of Antarctic ice shelf collapses amid warming

Wed Mar 26, 2008 7:59pm GMT

By Will Dunham

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Satellite images show that a large hunk of Antarctica's Wilkins Ice Shelf has started to collapse in a fast-warming region of the continent, scientists said on Tuesday.

The area of collapse measured about 160 square miles of the Wilkins Ice Shelf, according to satellite imagery from the University of Colorado's National Snow and Ice Data Center.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/03/26/healthscience/ice.php

Runaway ice chunk in Antarctica worries scientists

Published: March 26, 2008

The Associated Press

Published: March 26, 2008

WASHINGTON: A chunk of Antarctic ice seven times the size of Manhattan Island has suddenly collapsed, putting an even greater portion of glacial ice at risk, according to scientists.

Satellite images starting Feb. 28 show the runaway disintegration of a chunk covering 414 square kilometers, or 160 square miles. The ice was on the edge of the Wilkins Ice Shelf and had been there for possibly 1,500 years.

Tipping Points:

http://www.physorg.com/news121366474.html

Tipping elements in the Earth's climate system

Space & Earth science / Earth Sciences

Anthropogenic forcing could push the Earths climate system past critical thresholds, so that important components may tip into qualitatively different modes of operation. In the renowned magazine Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) an international team of researchers describes, where small changes can have large long-term consequences on human and ecological systems

Climate: Reversing Global Climate Change with Holistic Management

2008-05-28T14:31:00.001-07:00

Reversing Global Climate Change with Holistic Management

by Carolyn Lee

May 27, 2008

It's important to emphasize that the use of soil carbon sequestration as a way to reduce CO2 levels in the atmosphere is not just some theoretical construct. This is a natural process that occurs daily in every single tree, plant, and bush on earth! Plants take carbon dioxide from the air through photosynthesis and give oxygen back to it. We all learned that in elementary school science. I'm saying this because there are some very risky ideas being floated in some scientific circles about possible ways to reduce CO2 levels quickly. These ideas are theoretical. They are untested on a large scale and could have disastrous side effects and consequences, if they were to go awry.

How can they even consider taking such risks?! It's unconscionable! It would be absurd, and utterly irresponsible, to experiment on our already fragile planet in such a manner, when a simple, natural, inexpensive process already exists to remove CO2, namely soil carbon sequestration.

No harm can come to the planet in returning the excess CO2 to the soil, only restored soil health and productivity! There is no downside, and there is no risk involved. It's a win-win situation!

My guess is that it's simply a lack of exposure to this idea that has kept it from being more widely adopted. That's why you can make a difference just by passing this information along, to friends as well as everyone involved in the governmental decision-making process.

For More Information

At the bottom of this posting is a list of a variety of related online resources. Become informed yourself, and share this information with others.

Holistic Management International

Now I want to introduce you to a non-profit called Holistic Management International. HMI has been employing restorative land management techniques for more than twenty years. But more importantly, they already have cadres of trained, certified, professional educators available for consultation in the following regions: the United States, Canada, Mexico, Africa, Australia/New Zealand, and Europe. In other words, the expertise is available and ready to go! But their efforts need to be undertaken on a much larger scale worldwide than at present, in order to make a substantial reduction in planetary CO2 in the short amount of time we have left before triggering any more tipping points. There's no time to waste.

So spread the word!!

http://www.holisticmanagement.org/n7/climate_07.html

Reversing Global Climate Change with Holistic Management^®

With Holistic Management we can increase rangeland health and turn the tide, reversing much of the environmental devastation that has occurred.

Already, more than 30 million acres worldwide are being managed holistically.

Earth’s Breathing System at Risk

The earth’s ecosystem is stressed and malfunctioning due to dramatically diminished biodiversity, rapidly increasing worldwide desertification (land turning to desert), and global climate change. These are three legs of a single stool, not to be separated. This malfunctioning ecosystem has put the earth’s very breathing system at risk, among other adverse consequences, leaving the planet covered with damaged land that has lost its ability to remove sufficient amounts of CO2 from the atmosphere.

The Overlooked, Low-Tech Solution to Climate Change

There is a solution available to address the problem, one that has been overlooked.
This solution to the problem of the CO2 we have put in the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels and crop and forage residue is low-tech, low-cost and risk-free. It can be implemented with the resources we possess now. Most important, it is simple. With Holistic Management we can increase rangeland health and turn the tide, reversing much of the environmental devastation that has occurred.

Holistic Management®, which works in harmony with fundamental natural processes, is safe, secure, and offers great hope for a better future. The benefits of applying Holistic Management® Financial Planning, Grazing Planning, Land Planning and Biological Monitoring to the problem of climate change range from massively reducing carbon dioxide in our atmosphere to ensuring food and water security to producing greater revenue than the cost of implementation.

Already, more than 30 million acres worldwide are being managed holistically.

Biodiversity, Desertification and Global Climate Change are all Interconnected.

How Much Environmental Benefit Can Be Expected from Reversing Desertification?

The earth's dry rangelands alone are estimated to constitute over 12 billion acres, and the medium to higher rainfall rangelands increases the area significantly. A small increase in soil organic matter over these billions of acres would remove billions of tons of carbon from the atmosphere, store it, and go far toward restoring and permanently maintaining atmospheric balance. At the same time, any increase in soil organic matter enhances the soil's ability to store water.

Healthy Land & CO2

For the earth's soils to once more sequester carbon as they formerly did it is essential to restore living soils with ever increasing organic matter and abundant life forms. When we accomplish that, both rangelands and croplands will remove billions of tons of atmospheric carbon and store it in organic matter for ages.

Rangelands

Non-cropland areas, commonly called rangelands, include grasslands, savannas, man-made deserts, national parks, ranches, pastoral areas and deciduous forests. By using grazing and animal impact on our planet’s vast rangelands to restore lands to health and increase organic matter in soils, we can reverse the desertification that has occurred. This has been demonstrated repeatedly for nearly fifty years in several countries.

Croplands

Today, most agricultural soils are far from healthy, having lost much of their organic matter and structure due to the practices of industrial agriculture and other factors. Agricultural practices that mimic nature and restore soil health will remove and store carbon from the atmosphere risk-free. The knowledge to begin doing much of what is required is already available.

The Urgent Need To Reduce Biomass Burning

According to one NASA expert, every year, the equivalent of half of Africa, is burned at some point. This is the biomass burning that occurs in forests and grasslands around the world under traditional land management practices. Biomass burning releases CO2 into the atmosphere in amounts that may rival releases due to cars burning gasoline. In fact, 40% of CO2 annual production is biomass burning.

Holistic Management® vastly increases the productivity of land while significantly reducing any need for grassland burning by utilizing livestock and wildlife to maintain grasslands.

Cattle, Methane, Myth & Reality

“Globally, ruminant livestock produce about 80 million metric tons of methane annually, accounting for about 28% of global methane emissions from human-related activities.”
– U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. March 21, 2007

Myth
Grazing cattle, by definition, are a leading cause of global climate change for two reasons: they cause desertification by overgrazing land; they add methane to the atmosphere.

Reality
Overgrazing results from traditional grazing management practices and deep-seated misconceptions about animal/plant relationships. While all herbivores add methane to the atmosphere, no studies have been performed that reflect methane production by animals on ranges under planned grazing management.

Myth
Desertification is caused by overstocking and overgrazing by livestock. This has been a deeply held belief among agriculturalists for centuries.

Reality
Desertification is the result of too few animals on the land, not too many. Healthy and significant levels of animal impact from animals simulating the behavior of wild herds on rangeland sets up a chain reaction of events that help heal the land, increase organic matter in the soil and remove CO2 from the atmosphere and store vast amounts of water.

Myth
Cattle, which produce methane, are responsible for more greenhouse gases than automobiles.

Reality
The research data vilifying cattle has been obtained from mainstream, industrial, feedlot agriculture operations. There is an enormous distinction between animals in factory settings overfed on grains they did not evolve to eat and animals grazing on ranges as they evolved to do. Reports blaming cattle for climate change have caused tremendous damage, and unnecessary confusion, by distracting the debate from some of the genuine contributors to global warming, as well as the crucial role cattle can play in solving the problem.

Quotes from Experts about Cattle and the Environment

These experts tell a much different story than the widespread media reports about cattle that appeared in early 2007. Here are some unsensationalized perspectives on cattle that suggest methane research would produce different results if performed on land and cattle under Holistic Management®.

“Better grazing management and dietary supplementation have been identified as the most effective ways to improve efficiency and reduce emissions from this sector because they improve animal nutrition and reproductive efficiency... Improved livestock management can also reduce atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide through the mechanism of soil carbon sequestration on grazing lands... The bottom line – improved livestock management – is good for the environment and makes dollars and sense.”
–U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. March 21, 2007.

“Implementing proper grazing management practices to improve the quality of pastures increases animal productivity and has a significant effect on reducing CH4 emission from fermentation in the rumen."
–DeRamus, H. Alan, Terry C. Ct, Dean D. Giampola, and Peter C. Dickison. “Methane Emissions of Beef Cattle on Forages: Efficiency of Grazing Management Systems.” Journal of Environmental Quality Volume 32 (2003): 269-277.

“In many parts of the country, beef cattle are raised using a continuous stocking approach despite the numerous economic and environmental drawbacks of this technique. Continuous stocking is a management system where cattle have uninterrupted use of a unit of grazing land throughout the grazing season.. Because controlled grazing leads to more productive cows and greater liveweight gains per acre, producers can benefit from increased profits while reducing methane emissions per pound of beef produced. An additional benefit of controlled grazing is the increased ability of the pastures to act as a sink for carbon dioxide, the major greenhouse gas. As pasture quality improves with controlled grazing, carbon builds up in the soil and plant biomass, reducing the total amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.”
–Agriculture Education, University of Missouri, comp. Global Climate Change and Environmental Stewardship by Ruminant Livestock Producers. Missouri: National Council for Agricultural Education, 1998.

“While methane emissions from enteric fermentation represent the transformation of carbon already in circulation between the earth and the atmosphere, burning fossil fuel always results in a net increase in greenhouse gases... In a high-forage system, you're fixing more carbon than you are leaching, so you're actually subtracting from the greenhouse effect... Best efficiency is found in the compromise between utilizing the most energy-efficient feed source (forage) while maintaining herd production high enough to gain reasonable feed conversion efficiency."
–Michael Main, Research Associate, Nova Scotia Agricultural College

Seven Things You Can Do To Help

1. Support Holistic Management® International’s outreach efforts to educate others about the need for animals to improve land health and sequester carbon.

2. Buy locally grown organic produce and grassfed meat & dairy.

3. Buy carbon credits for all your personal fuel emissions.

4. Vote with your dollars. Invest in products that conserve resources (water conserving appliances, on-demand water heaters, photovoltaics, etc.)

5. Support low-tech solutions for getting carbon out of the air and high-tech solutions for keeping new carbon from getting in the air.

6. Reduce your ecological footprint. Learn how at: www.ecologicalfootprint.org

7. Increase your ecological literacy. Learn how we can develop symbiotic relationships with Nature so all may thrive.
___________

For more information:

-- Read the latest reports on global warming here: Is Global Warming for Real?

-- If you haven't watched it yet, be sure to view the exciting slide presentation at this post about soil carbon sequestration. A picture really is worth a thousand words! Putting Carbon Back Where It Belongs - In the Earth
-- Read about the environmental benefits of grassfarming here Grassfarming Can Help to Reverse Global Warming, and here Reversing Global Climate Change with Holistic Management
-- Read about how cows can be part of the global warming solution, and dispel some common myths about cows and methane. U.N. Blames Cows for Global Warming -- Unjustly
-- Read about the battle over raw milk here.

-- www.eatwild.com

-- www.sustainabletable.org

-- www.holisticmanagement.org

-- stockmangrassfarmer.net

-- www.westonaprice.org

-- Go to www.factoryfarm.org to learn more about confinement animal feeding operations (CAFOs). Be sure to watch The Meatrix.

-- Go to my blog posting about soy, to learn about the health hazards associated with the consumption of soy foods. A tremendous amount of information about soy is available through the Weston A. Price Foundation, among others.

-- Learn more about Monsanto. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Monsanto%27s+harvest+of+fear&btnG=Google+Search

Monsanto's Harvest of Fear

Monsanto's Harvest of Fear By Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele Vanity Fair. May 2008 Issue. Monsanto already dominates America's food chain with its genetically modified seeds ...

-- Read about the Clintons and their ties to Monsanto at Our Food, Monsanto & the Clintons.

Climate: Grassfarming Can Help to Reverse Global Warming

2008-05-28T14:30:00.004-07:00

Grassfarming Can Help to Reverse Global Warming

by Carolyn Lee

May 26, 2008

Agricultural policy in the United States is definitely going in the wrong direction. Confined animal feedlot operations (CAFOs) and the monoculture planting practices of agri-business are contributing mightily to global warming! The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has been supportive of these practices for decades now. The USDA needs to make some policy changes immediately!

Improper land management has been a major cause of the rise in greenhouse gases over the last century. When land is overused, it becomes degraded and loses its ability to store carbon in the soil. It actually becomes a net contributor to the problem, as any carbon which was previously stored there is released into the atmosphere. Soils can be rebuilt and returned to health.

Education is the key. If the USDA were to begin to advocate the use of sound grassfarming techniques, that would be a big step in the right direction. Let's make sure they choose to take that step.

What can you do to help?

Send all the soil carbon sequestration-related information on this site to your senators and congressmen/women. Probably 99% of them have never heard of this perfectly natural and cost-effective method of reducing carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere. Ask them to order the U.S. Department of Agriculture to support this nation's grass farmers, instead of trying to drive them out of business. Tell them to support a greater emphasis on grassfarming techniques at our publicly-funded, land grant universities. Tell them we want this nation's farmers to be a part of the solution rather than continue to be part of the problem.

Summaries of Studies

Here are summaries of some studies that demonstrate the environmental benefits of grassfarming. These summaries are drawn from the following site:
http://www.eatwild.com/environment.html

Grassfarming Benefits the Environment

http://www.eatwild.com/environment.html

When properly managed, raising animals on pasture instead of factory farms is a net benefit to the environment. To begin with, a diet of grazed grass requires much less fossil fuel than a feedlot diet of dried corn and soy. On pasture, grazing animals do their own fertilizing and harvesting. The ground is covered with greens all year round, so it does an excellent job of harvesting solar energy and holding on to top soil and moisture. As you will read in the bulletins below, grazed pasture removes carbon dioxide from the atmosphere more effectively than any land use, including forestland and ungrazed prairie, helping to slow global warming.

It’s a different story in a confinement operation. Here, the animals are crowded into sheds or kept outdoors on barren land and all their feed is shipped to them from distant fields. On those fields, the crops are treated with fossil-fuel based fertilizers, sprayed with pesticides, and planted, tilled, and harvested with heavy equipment. Each of these operations requires non-renewable fuel. Then the feed is shipped to feed manufacturers where it is dried, flaked or pelleted, and mixed with other ingredients and then, finally, shipped to the waiting animals, using yet more fossil fuel.

There is also a day-for-night difference in “manure management” on the two systems. On well-managed pasture-based farms, the animals spread their manure evenly over the soil where it becomes a natural source of organic fertilizer. The manure improves the quality of the grass, which increases the rate of gain of the animals. It’s a closed, sustainable system.

On factory farms, the excrement builds up in the feedlots and sheds where it fouls the air and releases ammonia and other gasses to the eco-system. The fumes stress and sicken the animals and farm workers, and they lower the quality of life of people in nearby homes. To get rid of the waste, it is shipped to nearby fields where it overloads the land with nutrients. The excess nitrogen and phosphorous pollute the soil and ground water and drain off into streams, rivers, and estuaries where it can create “dead zones” that threaten the fish population.

The news bulletins below provide more detailed information about the environmental benefits of keeping animals home on the range.

Keep ‘Em Moving to Reduce Greenhouse Gasses

All ruminants—including cattle, sheep, bison, and goats—belch up a significant amount of methane gas as they digest their grass-based diet. Methane gas is a potent contributor to global warming, so reducing methane production is an important step in protecting the environment.

Animal scientists have discovered that dividing pasture land into separate areas or “paddocks” and carefully managing the movement of cattle through those paddocks produces the highest quality grasses. Cattle that graze on this succulent grass produce as much as 20 percent less methane. This style of ranching is called “Management Intensive Grazing” or MiG, and it’s practiced by most of the ranchers on eatwild.com.

DeRamus, H. A., T. C. Clement, D. D. Giampola, and P. C. Dickison. "Methane Emissions of Beef Cattle on Forages: Efficiency of Grazing Management Systems." J Environ Qual 32, no. 1 (2003): 269-77.

Long-Lived Cows Reduce Global Warming

Bossy has a short lifespan when she is raised in a confinement dairy, which is the way most cows are raised today. She provides a very high volume of milk, partly due to hormone injections and a high-grain diet, but she lasts for only 2-3 years. Then infertility, disease, physical problems, or inflammation end her milking career, and she is sold at auction for hamburger.

Cows raised on grass are healthier and more fertile, making them good milk producers for up to twelve years. These long-lived and more contented cows may reduce greenhouse gas production (methane) between 10 and 11 percent according to a British Study.

Garnsworthy, P.C., The environmental impact of fertility in dairy cows: a modeling approach to predict methane and ammonia emissions, Animal Feed Science & Technology, 2004. 112: 211-223.

Pasture reduces topsoil erosion by 93 percent

Currently, the United States is losing three billion tons of nutrient-rich topsoil each year. Growing corn and soy for animal feed using conventional methods causes a significant amount of this soil loss. Compared with row crops, pasture reduces soil loss by as much as 93 percent.

(Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food, Robert P. Stone and Neil Moore, Fact Sheet 95-089 )

The Sierra Club recommends grass-fed beef

The Sierra Club recognizes the ecological advantages of raising cattle on pasture and therefore endorses grass-fed beef. The following remarks appear on its website: "Spared of the necessity of antibiotics and pesticides, grass-fed beef is also friendlier to the environment. Ranchers in the grass-fed market tend to be keen stewards of the land, concerned with proper grazing techniques and the nurturing of native grasses. Indeed, many such ranchers think of themselves as grass farmers first, cattle ranchers second."

Organic beef came in second. "If you can't find grass-fed beef, consider organic beef as a next best choice. While organically raised animals may still be confined in feeding operations and finished on grain rather than natural forage, they should at least be free of hormones, antibiotics and pesticides."

(http://www.sierraclub.org/e-files/grassfed.asp)

"Green grazing" brings back native plants

A growing number of grassfarmers are practicing "green grazing" or "conservation grazing," a type of management that is specifically designed to restore grazing land to a more natural and sustainable condition.

The T.O. Cattle Company in San Juan Bautista, California has been practicing green grazing since 1993. This process involves carefully controlling herd size and herd movement to "mimic natural disturbance of native ungulates on the landscape." In other words, the cattle are managed so that they have a similar impact on the land as native grazers, which in California include Tule elk, pronghorn, and deer.

Careful monitoring of the project shows that green grazing has: 1) increased the number and vigor of native plants, 2) increased the vegetative cover of stream banks, 3) expanded wetlands, 4) hastened the natural decomposition of cow manure, and 5) extended the growing season of the grassland. In addition, from 1998 to 2000, the percentage of perennial grasses increased from 40 to 50 percent.

Results of this grazing experiment were presented at the Society for Range Management – 2001 Annual Conference in Kailua-Kona, Hawaii.

Lambs control insects and increase crop yield

Insects can take a toll on alfalfa in the winter months. The usual procedure is to spray the fields with insecticides. A group of forward-thinking California scientists decided to apply lambs instead. Letting the lambs graze the winter stubble eliminated the insect problem and also increased the next year's hay crop by 14% over untreated land and 24% over fields treated with the insecticide Lorsban. Let little lambs eat ivy and alfalfa.

(J.N. Guerrero et al. J. of Animal Science Vol 80, Supplement 2, p. 126. "Grazing lambs control insects in alfalfa.")

Grassland may absorb more CO2 than trees

It's a well known fact that trees draw carbon dioxide from the air and store it as carbon, thereby slowing the rate of global warming. But a new study from Duke University reveals that restoring native grasslands might be a better solution than planting trees in wetter areas of the country.

"Grasses are deceptively productive," says lead investigator Robert Jackson. "You don't see where all the carbon goes, so there is a misconception that woody species [such as trees and shrubs] store more carbon. That's just not the case." Grasses store vast amounts of carbon in their underground root mass.

Raising cattle on grass is one way to make it financially feasible to expand our native grasslands. Although cows generate their own greenhouse gasses, the net effect of raising ruminants on pasture is to slow global warming.

For a more detailed summary of this research, go to: http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/aug2002/2002-08-08-07.asp

Jackson, R. B., J. L. Banner, E. G. Jobbagy, W. T. Pockman, and D. H. Wall. "Ecosystem Carbon Loss with Woody Plant

Finishing cattle on pasture may reduce greenhouse gasses

As the controversy about global warming heats up, more attention is being focused on the amount of greenhouse gasses produced by ruminants. Methane gas, a by-product of rumen digestion, is even more potent than carbon dioxide in trapping the sun's heat, making it a legitimate cause for concern. However, the production of methane gas is only a part of the complex environmental equation. An organization called the Institute for Environmental Research and Education or IERE has been comparing the overall impact on greenhouse gasses of raising animals on pasture or in a typical feedlot.

In the graph below, you can see IERE's side-by-side comparison of the two systems. The black bars represent feedlot animals and the green bars represent pastured animals. Although an animal raised on pasture actually produces more methane (represented by the bars in the category labeled "enteric") the pasture itself reduces the CO2 in the air through a process called "carbon sequestration." The net result is represented in the final bars on the right.

The verdict: fattening ruminants in a feedlot makes a significant contribution to global warming, while raising them on pasture may offset the animals' methane production and actually reduce greenhouse gasses.

For more information, contact Dr. Rita Schenck at iere.org

Moderate-intensity grazing encourages plant biodiversity and mimics the natural prairie

A team of researchers from Colorado State University led by Richard H. Hart studied plant communities in an area of Colorado that had been either protected from cattle grazing or grazed lightly, moderately, or heavily for 55 years. According to the investigators, "plant species biodiversity was greatest on the moderately-grazed pasture. It had more kinds of plants than the lightly or heavily grazed pastures and was not as completely dominated by the most common species as the ungrazed exclosures. Diversity was least in the ungrazed exclosures, which were overrun by plains pricklypear cactus." The researchers went on to say that "Rangeland today, moderately or heavily grazed by cattle, looks much like the same rangeland looked in the 1800s, before the Great Plains were settled." (Learn more by reading Plant Biodiversity on Shortgrass Steppe after 55 Years of Zero, Light, Moderate, or Heavy Cattle Grazing.)

Grazing animals make a visible contribution to soil fertility

In a conventional feedlot operation, large amounts of manure are deposited in a relatively small space that is devoid of living plants. Because there is an over-abundance of manure and nothing to fertilize, the manure becomes a "waste management problem" rather than a natural resource. Feedlot operators spend millions of dollars a year trying to curb the offensive odors, groundwater contamination, and surface runoff.

In sharp contrast, when animals are finished on pasture, their manure is deposited naturally over a large area of grassland, allowing the nutrients to be put to immediate use. In the photo at right, you can see a vivid illustration of how plant growth is encouraged by a well-managed grazing program. The aerial photograph shows grazing land managed by the T.O. Cattle Company a family-owned business that produces grass-finished beef. (Click on the photo for larger version) The photo was taken less than a year after Joe and Julie Morris began grazing their animals. The large triangular area of dark green just below the center of the photo is the land grazed by the cattle. The lighter green and less fertile areas surrounding the grazed land were either totally rested or less intensively grazed.

Increasing pasture land would help reduce global warming

Carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gasses are increasing in the Earth's atmosphere, leading to changes in our global climate. The grasses and legumes found in pasture are highly effective at removing excess carbon dioxide from the air and storing it in the soil as carbon, a phenomenon known as "carbon sequestration." Soils in the grazing land in the Great Plains have over 40 tons of carbon per acre, while cultivated soils have only 26. In recent years, land that had been planted in row crops was allowed to revert back to pasture as part of the US government's Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). The pasture land gained an average of one-half ton of carbon per acre per year during the first 5 years after planting. This means that 18 million tons of carbon were removed from the atmosphere each year as a result of farmers putting over 36 million acres of land into the conservation program.

Grazing better for the soil than growing grain

Six Minnesota pasture-based ranchers asked researchers to compare the health of their soil with soil from neighboring farms that produced corn, soybean, oats, or hay. At the end of four years of monitoring, researchers concluded that the carefully managed grazed land had:

53% greater soil stability
131% more earthworms
Substantially more organic matter
Less nitrate pollution of groundwater
Improved stream quality
Better habitat for grassland birds and other wildlife

Depending on the way that cattle are managed, they can either devastate a landscape or greatly improve the health of the soil. To be listed on our Eatwild Pastured Products Directory, producers must certify that they use best management practices.

("Managed Grazing as an Alternative Manure Management Strategy," Jay Dorsey, Jodi Dansingburg, Richard Ness, USDA-ARS, Land Stewardship Project.)

Grazed pasture is the best land use for storing carbon

Growing plants take carbon dioxide out of the air and "fix" it into the soil as organic matter. The more carbon dioxide that's taken out of the air, the lower the rate of global warming. Until recently, forested land and ungrazed grasslands were thought to be the best "sinks" or storehouses for carbon. The study iillustrated below concluded that well managed grazed pasture may be far better.

"Soil Organic Carbon in fields of switch grass and row crops as well as woodlots and pastures across the Chariton Valley, Iowa." Final Report. Lee Burras and Julie McLaughlin, Iowa State University, January 25, 2002.

Mother Nature knows better once again

The concentration of carbon dioxide in our air is rapidly rising, a condition that contributes to the greenhouse effect and potential global warming. The more of the carbon that can be contained in the soil, however, the less that escapes into the air. A report released by the USDA's Agricultural Research Service finds that soil stores 2 to 3 times more carbon when the grass was grazed than when it was harvested for hay or not harvested at all.

Another benefit of grazing, the researchers noted, was that grazing also reduces costs by lowering needs for herbicides and producing income from the livestock. They estimated that even putting as little as 10 percent of existing cropland into rotation with grazing would produce significant cost reductions.

More information is available online at http://ars.usda.gov/is/pr.

Growing corn and soy causes six times more soil erosion than pasture

Farming cannot be sustainable if the topsoil is constantly being eroded. Currently, the United States is losing three billion tons of nutrient-rich topsoil each year. The graph below shows the results of a new study from the University of Wisconsin Discovery Farms Program. Compared with grazed pasture, gently sloped land devoted to soy and corn production lost six times more topsoil each year. According to Dennis Frame, director of Discovery Farms, if the trend of selling cows and moving to grain production doesn't cease, soil erosion and nutrient losses will continue to climb.

(Article online at MyCattle.com)

For more information:

-- Read the latest reports on global warming here: Is Global Warming for Real?

-- www.eatwild.com

-- www.sustainabletable.org

-- www.holisticmanagement.org

-- stockmangrassfarmer.net

-- www.westonaprice.org

-- Go to www.factoryfarm.org to learn more about confinement animal feeding operations (CAFOs). Be sure to watch The Meatrix.

-- Learn more about Monsanto. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Monsanto%27s+harvest+of+fear&btnG=Google+Search

Monsanto's Harvest of Fear

Monsanto's Harvest of Fear By Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele Vanity Fair. May 2008 Issue. Monsanto already dominates America's food chain with its genetically modified seeds ...

-- Read about the Clintons and their ties to Monsanto at Our Food, Monsanto & the Clintons.

V-Climate: U.N. Blames Cows for Global Warming -- Unjustly!!

2008-05-28T14:30:00.003-07:00

U.N. Blames Cows for Global Warming -- Unjustly!!

by Carolyn Lee

May 25, 2008

The following passages are from an article by Matthew J. Rales which appeared in the Spring, 2008 edition of Wise Traditions, a publication of the Weston A. Price Foundation. The entire article is not yet available online. Matthew Rales obtained his BA in Environmental Studies from Middlebury College in Vermont. He recently completed an apprenticeship at Joel Salatin's grass-based Polyface Farm and is pursuing a career in grass-based farming at Polyface.

Before the excerpts from Matthew Rales, we have Michael Pollan. His video is an entertaining and thought provoking discussion about the relationships between people, food and plants; gardening, industrial agriculture, and farming.

The last section of the video wonderfully illustrates what is possible with grass and cows. In fact, Pollan is describing his visit to Joel Salatin's farm. He discusses how natural and ecologically balanced this system is, and how much food it produces.
(Sandra's comment: It's almost a side benefit that it also takes carbon out of the atmosphere. You can't get better than that!)

Farming in this way produces healthy animals, healthy plants, and extraordinarily health-supporting food. At the same time, it is BOTH ecologically and economically viable.

Go to the video on ted.com. The part about Salatin's farm starts a bit after 10:30 minutes.

The Omnivore's Next Dilemma

Now, to Rales.

An Inconvenient Cow: The Truth Behind the U.N. Assault on Ruminant Livestock

Matthew J. Rales
Wise Traditions, Spring, 2008 edition

In late November of 2006, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization released a startling report. Its official title is "Livestock's Long Shadow: Environmental Issues and Options". References to this report have been frequent in the last year, especially on environmental and nutrition-related fronts. The report accuses the cow of the worst environmental crimes -- land degradation, water pollution, acid rain, biodiveristy and habitat loss, desertification, deforestation, and foremost among the headlines, global warming. Cows and other ruminants are responsible for generating 65 percent of anthropogenic nitrous-oxide, 64 percent of ammonia, and 37 percent of the world's methane, the U.N. scientists declare.

Ancillary reports that expound upon these figures are everywhere. The American media have enjoyed selling the annihilator-cow theme to an audience conditioned by anti-animal foods propaganda and environmental fabrications, such as the "fact" that greedy farmers in the Amazon eradicate rainforest for more and more land to graze their cattle.

Syndicated nutrition columnists present us with lists of environmentally friendly food choices, invariably free of any and all animal products, and environmentalists cite the report as further evidence to keep cattle out of national parks and "protected" public lands.

But it's not just the mainstream news networks and publications that have circulated these accusations aginst livestock. Alternative energy and sustainable living magazines have produced a smattering of recent articles: "Eat Less Meat", "Meat is Methane", "Save the World; Go Vegan". These catchy titles sit on the magazine rack at your local natural foods co-op. And so the readership of these publications continues to patronize those trendy pseudo-foods like soy milk and veggie burgers -- the production of which is a principle reason for deforestation in the Amazon. The other use for soybeans from these degrading land use practices is feed for confinement animals -- beef and dairy cattle, pigs, poultry and fish -- for which pasteured cows continue to be blamed.

INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENTALISM

Make no mistake; rainforests are not cleared in any drastic measure by independent farmers who want to raise a few steers. They are cleared by United Nations-supported corporate giants under the guise of feeding the world and alleviating poverty -- all for the production of more of their patented seed. This seed, of which the U.N. and its "green" lobbyists are so fond, assumes the role of displacer of traditional food and farming all over the world. That means health-giving foods like lamb tallow for frying, lard for baking, and real butter, which the industry-led dietitians have condemned from on high, are the foods these GMO seeds are replacing. It is no wonder the U.N. has launched its campaign against livestock -- these animals represent the only food source that can supply the people with enough good nutrition to empower them (both physically and emotionally) to resist the global onslaught of food police, biotech crops and chemicals.

A recent article in Business Week reports that Brazil alone grows over 25 million acres of soybeans -- all of which are genetically engineered. The Wall Street Journal reports that Monsanto's stock has tripled in the last year due to Brazil's demand for Roundup Ready soybeans -- a genetically engineered plant that can withstand multiple, frequent applications of toxic herbicide.

Allan Nation, editor of the Stockman Grass Farmer, reports back from his recent trip to Argentina that "eight dollar" soybeans for world export are edging out the domestic, sustainable grass-fed beef industry. Why don't we hear environmentalists denouncing this supreme symbol of industrial agriculture with the same passion they muster for condemning beef? Why are the green-conscious not boycotting the oilseed plant that literally drinks Middle Eastern oil in the form of petrochemical herbicides? That's because our society has been conditioned to support a co-opted environmental movement in the name of a chemical-intensive vegetable bypass industry, at the tragic expense of good health to both man and environment via the qualities of grazing animals (those methane-belching creatures that we love to hate) and their products -- meat and milk for people, manure for the soil -- none of which our society can afford to lose.

DESTRUCTIVE PARADIGM

The real paradox of the report is the way in which it avoids dealing with the twin-conundrum of mass-scale monocultural grain production and confinement animal feeding operations (CAFOs). These are the two destructive pillars of an industry gone wrong, yet the U.N. points its global finger not at bad management practices like feedlots and confinement dairies, but at the cows themselves; not at Monsanto, but at real farmers, who raise livestock in accordance with nature's principles -- on grass.
[end of first excerpt]

Later, Matthew Rales continues...

SIXTY MILLION BISON

In his fascinating recent book, 1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus, Charles Mann paints a picture of wild ruminant populations before the arrival of Europeans: "North America at the time of Columbus was home to sixty million bison, thirty to forty million pronghorns, ten million elk, ten million mule deer, and as many as two million mountain sheep". That's just North America. We have not even considered the enormous herds pounding the African plains, nearly all of which are methane-producing ruminants including wildebeest, Cape buffalo, giraffes, gazelles, antelope, kudu -- you get the point. Even today, these animals number in the hundreds of millions; their number were many fold greater in the past. How can it be that we have been able to overlook this perfectly natural scenario and move forward with casting the blame on the world's 1.5 billion domesticated cattle?

Nature's herds are by no means light on the land. Reports from the travels of Lewis and Clark attest to the fact that the herds of bison left not one scrap of fodder for their horses to eat, and the land was coated with a sheet of manure so thick, it turned vast expanses of prairie black. This manure, with the help of sage grouse, prairie chickens and dung beetles was then quickly recycled into some of the richest soil on the planet; this is the same manure that the U.N. blames for poisoning our atmosphere with nitrous-oxide.

MIMICKING NATURE

Managed grazing, which attempts to mimic the grazing patterns of these great wild herds, can produce an abundance of nutritious animal foods, while sequestering massive amounts of atmospheric carbon. We are told by the global warming gurus that the earth is heating up due to excess carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Through specific grazing strategies we can sequester this excess carbon and form rich, productive topsoil in the process. We do this not by planting more trees, or even setting aside more wildlife preserves. We do this with domesticated ruminants -- pulsing the landscape with large numbers of animals for short periods of time.

In nature, bison and wildebeest graze in huge mobs, remaining in one location briefly, and then they move on to fresh ground. They keep bunched together tightly for fear of pack-hunting predators. These ruminants are Nature's soil-building and fertility management mechanism. We also know that the soils under which these animals graze are our largest land-based carbon sinks on earth. All we need to do, then, is to mimic these native grazing patterns with our domestic stock, and we have an easily achieved, rapid solution to the excess carbon in the atmosphere.

The hoof action, manure, urine, and saliva all act as bio-stimulants on the pasture, encouraging the grass plants to thicken, bare spots to fill in, and species diversity and succession to accelerate forward from simplicity to complexity. The productive grasslands of the world and the massive herds of herbivores that grazed them coevolved together. One cannot exist without the other. The grass relies on the ruminant for its full expression just as much as the ruminant relies on grass. Without ruminants to fertilize the soil and break down cellulose in dry climates, prairies quickly become deserts; and with managed grazing of ruminant animals, deserts can be restored to productive land.

GRASS-FED BUTTER: MOST ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY FOOD

Grass farmers produce the most ecologically sensible food on earth, food derived nearly in its entirety from solar energy. Grass-fed butter is perhaps the finest example of solar energy converted into nutrient-dense food for people. Grass-fed meat and other grass-fed dairy products are equally wonderful, earth-friendly foods. However, I use butter here to illustrate how we can derive pure, nutrient-dense animal energy from solar energy with very few steps in between. Here's how it works: Grass plants convert solar energy (and atmospheric carbon dioxide) into plant biomass, and the cow synthesizes that plant material into her own energy via the cellulose-digesting microbes in her rumen. From this energy she then produces milk, of which the energy-rich portion (the cream) is separated. The cream is then made even more energy-dense through churning into butter. No chemicals or petroleum required (exc ept electricity for churning the butter); just the sun, the grass and the cow (and her rumen flora) in an elegantly simple process.

Let's run a quick comparison to the production of a food that the U.N. and its whistleblowers tell us has a smaller ecological footprint -- the production of vegetable oil. First the soil must be plowed; a process that requires immense amounts of diesel fuel. Then the seed, whether it's rapeseed (canola), soybeans, or corn or any other oil-producing seed, must be planted. This is accomplished by a tractor as well, thus more fossil fuel. After the plant begins to grow, the field must be cultivated to kill the invading weeds. Then the fields are sprayed several times by a tractor-mounted rig, dowsing the fields in oil-derived petrochemical herbicide. If bugs are a problem out comes the pesticide, also derived from oil. Harvest time, and massive combining ensues. The seeds are then trucked cross-country to a factory where a multi-step refining process takes place. The factory is similar in design and practice to a crude oil refinery.

After much chemical and mechanical refining of our seed, we have a product, which is not food, but which the U.N. tells us is the earth-friendly substitute for our solar energy-derived butter.

[end of excerpt]

Carolyn's comment: Obviously we can't trust the United Nations to solve the problem of global warming! They have a hidden agenda, as usual!

For more information:

-- Read the latest reports on global warming here: Is Global Warming for Real?

-- If you haven't watched it yet, be sure to view the exciting slide presentation at this post about soil carbon sequestration. A picture really is worth a thousand words! Putting Carbon Back Where It Belongs - In the Earth
-- Read about the environmental benefits of grassfarming here Grassfarming Can Help to Reverse Global Warming, and here Reversing Global Climate Change with Holistic Management
-- Read about the importance and value of cows and about the battle over raw milk here.

-- www.eatwild.com

-- www.sustainabletable.org

-- www.holisticmanagement.org

-- stockmangrassfarmer.net

-- www.westonaprice.org

-- Go to www.factoryfarm.org to learn more about confinement animal feeding operations (CAFOs). Be sure to watch The Meatrix.

-- Learn more about Monsanto. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Monsanto%27s+harvest+of+fear&btnG=Google+Search

Monsanto's Harvest of Fear

Monsanto's Harvest of Fear By Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele Vanity Fair. May 2008 Issue. Monsanto already dominates America's food chain with its genetically modified seeds ...

-- Read about the Clintons and their ties to Monsanto at Our Food, Monsanto & the Clintons.

A Wiser Perspective on Drugs

2008-05-19T09:26:00.004-07:00

The War on Drugs has turned the black market drug trade into a highly profitable business. Please see this posting for astonishing pictures.

Dr. Ron Paul has a sensible perspective on drugs. And he is quite accurate in comparing the War on Drugs with the War on Terror. Whatever you fight, you actually create MORE of.

The following is from the ronpaul2008.com site.

War on Terror? It's as Bad as War on Drugs

Summary:
For the first 140 years of our history, we had essentially no Federal war on drugs, and far fewer problems with drug addiction and related crimes was a consequence. In the past 30 years, even with the hundreds of millions of dollars spent on the drug war, little good has come of it. We have vacillated from efforts to stop the drugs at the source to severely punishing the users, yet nothing has improved. This war has been behind most big government policy powers of the last 30 years, with continual undermining of our civil liberties and personal privacy.

by Ron Paul, Dr. October 30, 2001

I would like to draw an analogy between the drug war and the war against terrorism. In the last 30 years, we have spent hundreds of billions of dollars on a failed war on drugs. This war has been used as an excuse to attack our liberties and privacy. It has been an excuse to undermine our financial privacy while promoting illegal searches and seizures with many innocent people losing their lives and property. Seizure and forfeiture have harmed a great number of innocent American citizens.

Another result of this unwise war has been the corruption of many law enforcement officials. It is well known that with the profit incentives so high, we are not even able to keep drugs out of our armed prisons. Making our whole society a prison would not bring success to this floundering war on drugs. Sinister motives of the profiteers and gangsters, along with prevailing public ignorance, keep this futile war going. Illegal and artificially high priced drugs drive the underworld to produce, sell and profit from this social depravity. Failure to recognize that drug addiction, like alcoholism, is a disease rather than a crime, encourage the drug warriors in efforts that have not and will not ever work. We learned the hard way about alcohol prohibition and crime, but we have not yet seriously considered it in the ongoing drug war.

Corruption associated with the drug dealers is endless. It has involved our police, the military, border guards and the judicial system. It has affected government policy and our own CIA. The artificially high profits from illegal drugs provide easy access to funds for rogue groups involved in fighting civil wars throughout the world. Ironically, opium sales by the Taliban and artificially high prices helped to finance their war against us. In spite of the incongruity, we rewarded the Taliban this spring with a huge cash payment for promises to eradicate some poppy fields. Sure.

For the first 140 years of our history, we had essentially no Federal war on drugs, and far fewer problems with drug addiction and related crimes was a consequence. In the past 30 years, even with the hundreds of millions of dollars spent on the drug war, little good has come of it. We have vacillated from efforts to stop the drugs at the source to severely punishing the users, yet nothing has improved. This war has been behind most big government policy powers of the last 30 years, with continual undermining of our civil liberties and personal privacy. Those who support the IRS's efforts to collect maximum revenues and root out the underground economy, have welcomed this intrusion, even if the drug underworld grows in size and influence.

The drug war encourages violence. Government violence against nonviolent users is notorious and has led to the unnecessary prison overpopulation. Innocent taxpayers are forced to pay for all this so-called justice. Our eradication project through spraying around the world, from Colombia to Afghanistan, breeds resentment because normal crops and good land can be severely damaged. Local populations perceive that the efforts and the profiteering remain somehow beneficial to our own agenda in these various countries.

Drug dealers and drug gangs are a consequence of our unwise approach to drug usage. Many innocent people are killed in the crossfire by the mob justice that this war generates. But just because the laws are unwise and have had unintended consequences, no excuses can ever be made for the monster who would kill and maim innocent people for illegal profits. But as the violent killers are removed from society, reconsideration of our drug laws ought to occur.

A similar approach should be applied to our war on those who would terrorize and kill our people for political reasons. If the drug laws and the policies that incite hatred against the United States are not clearly understood and, therefore, never changed, the number of drug criminals and terrorists will only multiply. Although this unwise war on drugs generates criminal violence, the violence can never be tolerated. Even if repeal of drug laws would decrease the motivation for drug dealer violence, this can never be an excuse to condone the violence. On the short term, those who kill must be punished, imprisoned, or killed. Long term though, a better understanding of how drug laws have unintended consequences is required if we want to significantly improve the situation and actually reduce the great harms drugs are doing to our society.

The same is true in dealing with those who so passionately hate us that suicide becomes a just and noble cause in their effort to kill and terrorize us. Without some understanding of what has brought us to the brink of a worldwide conflict in reconsidering our policies around the globe, we will be no more successful in making our land secure and free than the drug war has been in removing drug violence from our cities and towns.

Without some understanding why terrorism is directed towards the United States, we may well build a prison for ourselves with something called homeland security while doing nothing to combat the root causes of terrorism. Let us hope we figure this out soon. We have promoted a foolish and very expensive domestic war on drugs for more than 30 years. It has done no good whatsoever. I doubt our Republic can survive a 30-year period of trying to figure out how to win this guerilla war against terrorism. Hopefully, we will all seek the answers in these trying times with an open mind and understanding.

Health: Maple Syrup & Baking Soda for Cancer

2008-05-19T09:26:00.001-07:00

The International Medical Veritas Association gives us information about normal, health supporting household substances being used effectively in cancer treatment.

Why don't we hear about this from the medical system, the government, and the media? Because there is no money to be made from simple, natural, and effective solutions!
Sandra

Maple Syrup and Baking Soda Cancer Treatment

Tonight we are going back to medical basics with the application of the least expensive, safest and perhaps most effective cancer medicine there is. Sodium bicarbonate has been on many cancer patients’ minds this past year. It has not been easy though to get to Rome or even contact Dr. Tullio Simoncini for treatment. And doctors willing to give bicarbonate IVs are not on every corner so it’s been somewhat frustrating to have something so simple and effective remain elusive. If doctors doing such treatments want to be listed by the IMVA for referral please contact us.

Though we have known that oral intake of sodium bicarbonate will have the ‘Simoncini” effect on oral, esophagus and stomach cancer we have not focused at all on the systemic effect of bicarbonate taken orally. Every cancer patient and every health care practitioner should know that oral intake of sodium bicarbonate offers an instant and strong shift of blood pH into the alkaline.

So strong is the effect that athletes can notice the difference in their breathing as more oxygen is carried throughout the system and as more acids are neutralized.[i] The difference can be stunning for those whose respiration is labored under intense exercise loading.[ii] This tells us to take very seriously the oral use of bicarbonate for cancer treatment no matter what other treatment is used.

This diagram shows the diffusion directions for H+, CO2, and O2 between the blood and the muscle cells during exercise. The resulting concentration changes affect the buffer equilibria, shown in the upper right-hand corner of the diagram (yellow). If the amounts of H+ and CO2 exceed the capacity of hemoglobin, they affect the carbonic acid equilibrium, as predicted by Le Châtelier's Principle or the quantitative treatment in terms of equilibrium constants. As a result, the pH of the blood is lowered, causing acidosis. The lungs and kidneys respond to pH changes by removing CO2, HCO3-, and H+ from the blood.

When one reads my thesis on different medicinal substances one has to always remember that I am a protocol man who does not support single shot cures for anything. With the publication of today’s chapter on sodium bicarbonate and maple syrup sodium bicarbonate slips securely into the number three spot right behind magnesium chloride and iodine. Each of these three substances effects directly onto basic human physiology in a way most pharmaceutical drugs do not. When used together we have a super threesome that will inexpensively go far to resolving many of the physical and even some of the emotional problems we and our children face. And if you have not made the connection please note that all three of these substances are used in emergency rooms and intensive care wards and they do commonly save lives every day with their inherent healing powers. See my chapter on emergency room medicine and cancer treatment.

All cancer sufferers and in fact every chronic disease patient should hold clearly in mind that pH is the regulatory authority that controls most cellular processes. The pH balance of the human bloodstream is recognized by medical physiology texts as one of the most important biochemical balances in all of human body chemistry. pH is the acronym for "Potential Hydrogen". In definition, it is the degree of concentration of hydrogen ions in a substance or solution. It is measured on a logarithmic scale from 0 to 14. Higher numbers mean a substance is more alkaline in nature and there is a greater potential for absorbing more hydrogen ions. Lower numbers indicate more acidity with less potential for absorbing hydrogen ions.

Our body pH is very important because pH controls the speed of our body's biochemical reactions. It does this by controlling the speed of enzyme activity as well as the speed that electricity moves through our body; the higher (more alkaline) the pH of a substance or solution, the more electrical resistance that substance or solution holds. Therefore, electricity travels slower with higher pH. If we say something has an acid pH, we are saying it is hot and fast. Alkaline pH on the other hand, bio-chemically speaking, is slow and cool.

Body ph level changes are intense in the profundity of their biological effects. Even genes directly experience external pH. pH differentially regulates a large number of proteins. Increased oxidative stress, which correlates almost exponentially with ph changes into the acidic, is especially dangerous to the mitochondria, which suffer the greatest under oxidative duress. Epigenetics, which may now have begun eclipsing traditional genetics, commonly describes how factors such as diet and smoking, rather than inheritance influence how genes behave.

The following chapter comes after 100 pages of text in the Yeast and Fungi Invaders section of the Winning the War on Cancer book. Please note that sodium bicarbonate taken in water alone will have a powerful effect on entire body physiology because of the instant shift into alkaline pH levels. Bicarbonate can be taken frequently throughout the day with half teaspoons amounts though for long term use lower doses are safer. For cancer patients initial use should be heavy and frequent to force a greater shift because smaller pH shifts can actually stimulate cancer growth.

Common sense knowledge speaks loudly about cancer and Candida patients avoiding glucose. This is similar to the common sense of pilots who know to pull back on the stick to pull out of a dive. That works until you approach the speed of sound and at that point all the pulling in the world will not work. You have to push the stick forward and do what instincts scream not to do. Several died trying until Chuck Yeager pushed that stick forward and became the first man to break the speed of sound.

Bicarbonate Maple Cancer Treatment

International Medical Veritas Association

The bicarbonate maple syrup cancer treatment focuses on delivering natural chemotherapy in a way that effectively kills cancer cells but significantly reduces the brutal side effects experienced with most standard chemotherapy treatments. In fact so great is the reduction that the dangers are brought down to zero. Costs, which are a factor for the majority of people, of this particular treatment are nil. Though this cancer treatment is very inexpensive, do not assume it is not effective. The bicarbonate maple syrup cancer treatment is a very significant cancer treatment every cancer patient should be familiar with and it can easily be combined with other safe and effective natural treatments.

This cancer treatment is similar in principle to Insulin Potentiation Therapy (IPT). IPT treatment consists of giving doses of insulin to a fasting patient sufficient to lower blood sugar into the 50 mg/dl. In a normal person, when you take in sugar the insulin levels go up to meet the need of getting that sugar into the cells. In IPT they are artificially injecting insulin to deplete the blood of all sugar then injecting the lower doses of toxic chemo drugs when the blood sugar is driven down to the lowest possible value. During the low peak, it is said that the receptors are more sensitive and take on medications more rapidly and in higher amounts.

The bicarbonate maple syrup treatment works in reverse to IPT. Dr. Tullio Simoncini acknowledges that cancer cells gobbles up sugar so when you encourage the intake of sugar it’s like sending in a Trojan horse. The sugar is not going to end up encouraging the further growth of the cancer colonies because the baking soda is going to kill the cells before they have a chance to grow. Instead of artificially manipulating insulin and thus forcefully driving down blood sugar levels to then inject toxic chemo agents we combine the sugar with the bicarbonate and present it to the cancer cells, which at first are going to love the present. But not for long!

This treatment is a combination of pure, 100% maple syrup and baking soda and was first reported on the Cancer Tutor site. When mixed and heated together, the maple syrup and baking soda bind together. The maple syrup targets cancer cells (which consume 15 times more glucose than normal cells) and the baking soda, which is dragged into the cancer cell by the maple syrup, being very alkaline forces a rapid shift in pH killing the cell. The actual formula is to mix one part baking soda with three parts (pure, 100%) maple syrup in a small saucepan. Stir briskly and heat the mixture for 5 minutes. Take 1 teaspoon daily, is what is suggested by Cancer Tutor but one could probably do this several times a day.

“There is not a tumor on God’s green earth that cannot be licked with a little baking soda and maple syrup.” That is the astonishing claim of controversial folk healer Jim Kelmun who says that this simple home remedy can stop and reverse the deadly growth of cancers. His loyal patients swear by the man they fondly call Dr. Jim and say he is a miracle worker. “Dr. Jim cured me of lung cancer,” said farmer Ian Roadhouse. “Those other doctors told me that I was a goner and had less then six months to live. But the doc put me on his mixture and in a couple of months the cancer was gone. It did not even show up on the x-rays.”

Dr. Jim discovered this treatment accidentally somewhere in the middle of the last century when he was treating a family plagued by breast cancer. There were five sisters in the family and four of them had died of breast cancer. He asked the remaining sister if there was anything different in her diet and she told him that she was partial to sipping maple syrup and baking soda. Since then, reported by a newspaper in Ashville, North Carolina, Dr. Jim dispensed this remedy to over 200 people diagnosed with terminal cancer and amazingly he claims of that number 185 lived at least 15 more years and nearly half enjoyed a complete remission of their disease. When combined with other safe and effective treatments like transdermal magnesium therapy, iodine, vitamin C, probiotics and other items like plenty of good sun exposure, pure water and clay treatments we should expect even higher remission rates.

It is very important not to use baking soda which has had aluminum added to it. The Cancer Tutor site reports that Arm and Hammer does have aluminum but the company insists that is not true. One can buy a product which specifically states it does not include aluminum or other chemicals. (e.g. Bob's Red Mill, Aluminum-Free, Baking Soda). Sodium bicarbonate is safe, extremely inexpensive and unstoppably effective when it comes to cancer tissues. It’s an irresistible chemical, cyanide to cancer cells for it hits the cancer cells with a shock wave of alkalinity, which allows much more oxygen into the cancer cells than they can tolerate. Cancer cells cannot survive in the presence of high levels of oxygen. Studies have already shown how manipulation of tumor pH with sodium bicarbonate enhances some forms of chemotherapy.[iii]

“The therapeutic treatment of bicarbonate salts can be administered orally, through aerosol, intravenously and through catheter for direct targeting of tumors,” says oncologist Dr. Tullio Simoncini. “Sodium bicarbonate administered orally, via aerosol or intravenously can achieve positive results only in some tumors, while others – such as the serious ones of the brain or the bones - remain unaffected by the treatment.”

The maple syrup apparently enables and increases penetration of bicarbonate into all compartments of body, even those which are difficult or impossible to penetrate by other means. These compartments include the central nervous system (CNS), through the blood-brain barrier, joints, solid tumors, and perhaps even the eyes. IPT makes cell membranes more permeable, and increases uptake of drugs into cells. The maple syrup will make tissues more permeable, too. It will transport the bicarbonate across the blood-brain barrier and every other barrier in the body for sugar is universally needed by all cells in the body. The essence of IPT is that it allows cancer drugs to be given in a smaller dose, far less toxic to normal cells, while building up lethally toxic concentrations in cancer cells. Both IPT and bicarbonate maple syrup treatments use the rabid growth mechanisms of the cancer cell against them.

Dr. Jim did not have contact with Dr. Simoncini and did not know that he is the only oncologist in the world who would sustain the combining of sugar with bicarbonate. Dr. Simoncini always directs his patients to dramatically increase sugar intake with his treatments but has never thought to mix the two directly by cooking them together. Because his treatments depend on interventionist radiologists who insert catheters to direct the bicarbonate as close to the affected area as possible, or physicians willing to do expensive intravenous treatments, I pushed bicarbonate up into the number six slot in the IMVA cancer protocol. With the discovery of Dr. Jim’s work bicarbonate comes back into our number three spot right behind magnesium chloride and iodine.

That number three slot for a brief time was held by hemp oil containing THC. The great advantage that maple syrup and bicarbonate treatment has over this type hemp oil is that it is legal thus easily obtainable. The two together, backed by a solid protocol of other nutritional substances makes winning the war on cancer almost a certainty. When using these substances it is safer to change one’s vocabulary and not say one is treating and curing cancer. Far better to conceptualize that one is treating the infectious aspect of cancer, the fungus and yeast colonies and the yeast like bacteria that are the cause of TB.

Dr. Simoncini says that, “In some cases, the aggressive power of fungi is so great as to allow it, with only a cellular ring made up of three units, to tighten in its grip, capture and kill its prey in a short time notwithstanding the prey's desperate struggling. Fungus, which is the most powerful and the most organized micro-organism known, seems to be an extremely logical candidate as a cause of neoplastic proliferation.”

pH of the blood is the most important factor to determine the state of the microorganisms in the blood.

“Sodium bicarbonate therapy is harmless, fast and effective because it is extremely diffusible. A therapy with bicarbonate for cancer should be set up with strong dosage, continuously, and with pauseless cycles in a destruction work which should proceed from the beginning to the end without interruption for at least 7-8 days. In general a mass of 2-3-4 centimeters will begin to consistently regress from the third to the fourth day, and collapses from the fourth to the fifth,” says Dr Simoncini.

There are many ways to use sodium bicarbonate and it is a universal drug like iodine and magnesium chloride. Raising pH increases the immune system's ability to kill bacteria, concludes a study conducted at The Royal Free Hospital and School of Medicine in London. Viruses and bacteria that cause bronchitis and colds thrive in an acidic environment. To fight a respiratory infection and dampen symptoms such as a runny nose and sore throat, taking an alkalizing mixture of sodium bicarbonate and potassium bicarbonate will certainly help.

The apple cider vinegar 1/4 teaspoon and 1/4 teaspoon baking soda taken 2 times or more a day is another treatment as is lemon and baking soda, or lime and baking soda formulas. Perhaps honey could be substituted for maple syrup for those who live in parts of the world where maple syrup is not available but to my knowledge no one has experimented with this.

Mark Sircus Ac., OMD
Director International Medical Veritas Association
http://www.imva.info
http://www.magnesiumforlife.com
http://www.winningcancer.com/

Go to the International Medical Veritas Association's website for more information about sodium bicarbonate and cancer. My quick search there did not come up with the maple syrup information above, which I was actually searching for. But there are some interesting case studies here. There is a lot of very interesting information on this website.

Sodium Bicarbonate

Lessons in Cancer and General pH Management

International Medical Veritas Association

Health: Mandatory Vaccinations vs. Health Freedom

2008-05-17T19:40:00.004-07:00

This is a critically important issue!

Though we are told that vaccinations are required for us to be truly healthy, in reality, tremendous evidence supports the opposite conclusion. Vaccination of the masses may well be one of the most damaging things that a population can bring upon itself.

I believe that vaccination of our population over the years is a MAJOR contributor to the explosion of health problems that our society is experiencing. New and devastating diseases mysteriously appear with increasing frequency. And government and the medical establishment are at a loss to understand why!

As far as I am concerned, the answers are as follows: VACCINATIONS, MALNUTRITION, and MEDICATIONS. Really, that's it. What you put into the body makes up the body. There's not much of a mystery there. Vaccination is a major contributor to the destruction of the fabric of our country's health. And without health, you really don't have much.

In recent months, there have been an increasing number of reports of people being FORCED to vaccinate their children, absolutely against both their will and their personal beliefs. This is criminal, and as regular readers of this blog frequently read here, it is also unconstitutional.

Read the articles below and learn HOW and WHY this is so devastating to our health.

Universal Health Care?

This is a commonly debated issue in the presidential campaign. Are you aware that, with universal health care, we will be essentially required to be vaccinated?!? They are not telling us this, but if you look at how vaccinations are being forced on people now, doesn't it make sense that this will increase? Personally, I have ALWAYS been opposed to mandatory health care coverage.

At the bottom of this posting is a segment discussing this horrific potentiality.

Russell Blaylock on Vaccinations

Blaylock is a neurosurgeon who explains what happens in the body when vaccinations are given. Here are links to several articles.

Read them, and you will never again allow yourself or your children to be vaccinated. You may even start telling other people. The first article I read (listed third below) really fired me up, and now I am an avid Blaylock advocate. (In my Food, Glorious Food blog, I wrote about Blaylock's book on MSG and Aspartame, Excitotoxins: the Taste That Kills. Highly recommended - and relatively easy to read. The MSG and vaccine issues are very much related, as you will understand through reading the articles.)

Thanks to Mercola.com for providing this material. I frequently draw from his website for posts here. Doctor Mercola does humanity a tremendous service by providing access to important health information. His newsletter covers a vast array of topics. Consider subscribing through the mercola.com website. Though he may never know it, Dr. Mercola is a mentor of sorts for me in blogging. He provides a stellar model of service via the blog.

I thank my mother, Carolyn Lee, for compiling this information into a format which I could easily post. Before she did this work, I was stopped by the size of the project. Thanks, Mom.
Sandra

Ron Paul on Health Freedom
For more information on Ron Paul regarding Health Care in general, see the ronpaul2008.com site.
For his position specific to Health Freedom, go to a posting on my blog here. This was drawn from the ronpaul2008 site.
"I also opposed the Homeland Security Bill, H.R. 5005, which, in section 304, authorizes the forced vaccination of American citizens against small pox. The government should never have the power to require immunizations or vaccinations."

Mandatory Vaccinations versus Health Freedom

Carolyn Lee (with a few additions by Sandra)
April 29, 2008

Does the government have the constitutional authority to force you to vaccinate your children?

Where in the U.S. Constitution does it state that the federal government can mandate vaccinations for anyone?!

Here are three shocking papers by Russell L. Blaylock, M.D. that tie vaccinations to the skyrocketing incidences of autism, ADD, ADHD, Gulf War Syndrome, Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's dementia, and ALS (Lou Gehrig's disease) in this country.

This may well be the most important reading that you ever do regarding your health.

Highlights from the articles are posted here for your convenience.

I suggest that you print off hard copies, including references, and plan to keep them for the rest of your life. Sometime in the future, you may choose to refuse one or more vaccinations for yourself or a loved one, and you will need documentation of the dangers to show your medical practitioners.

What They Don't Tell You About Vaccinations Can Kill You or Ruin Your Life
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2004/05/12/vaccination-dangers.aspx

The Dangers of Excessive Vaccination During Brain Development
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/pages/the-danger-of-excessive-vaccination-during-brain-development.aspx

Vaccines, Depression and Neurodegeneration After Age 50
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/pages/vaccines-depression-and-neurodegeneration-after-age-50.aspx

Selected Highlights from the Blaylock articles, with emphasis added:

*Vaccination and Brain Inflammation

A great number of studies have shown that when you vaccinate an animal, the body's inflammatory cytokines not only increase dramatically, but so do the brain's inflammatory chemicals. The brain has its own immune system that is intimately connected to the body's immune system. The main immune cell in the brain is called a microglia. Normally, these brain cells are lying throughout the brain in a resting state (called ramified).

Once activated, they can move around, traveling between brain cells like amoeba (called amoeboid microglia).

In the resting state, they release chemicals that support the growth and protection of brain cells and their connections (dendrites and synapses). But when activated, they secrete a number of very harmful chemicals, including inflammatory cytokines, chemokines, complement, free radicals, lipid peroxidation products, and two excitotoxins -- glutamate and quinolinic acid.

In essence, these brain immune cells are out to kill invaders, since the body's immune system sent an emergency message that an invasion had occurred. With most infections, this phase of activation last no more than a few days to two weeks, during which time the immune system successfully kills off the invaders.

Once that is accomplished, the immune system shuts down to allow things to cool off and the brain to repair what damage was done by its own immune system.

Stimulating your immune system with a vaccine is far different than contracting an infectious illness naturally. Vaccines are made of two components -- the agent you wish to vaccinate against -- for example, the measles virus; and an immune system booster called an immune adjuvant.

These adjuvants are composed of such things as aluminum compounds, MSG, lipid compounds and even mercury. Their job is to make the immune system react as intensely as possible and for as long as possible.

Studies have shown that these adjuvants, from a single vaccine, can cause immune overactivation for as long as two years. This means that the brain microglia remain active as well, continuously pouring out destructive chemicals. In fact, one study found that a single injection of an immune activating substance could cause brain immune overactivation for over a year. This is very destructive.

* * * * * *

*The average child receiving all of the recommended vaccines will have some 24 inoculations by age one year and 36 by the time they enter school.

Most of these will be spaced within one month of each other, which means the priming and activation cycle of the microglia will be continuous. In addition, the dose of immune stimulants is excessive. At birth they receive 1 vaccine, at two months of age they receive 6 additional vaccines, at four months of age 5 vaccines, at age six months 7 vaccines and at age one year, 5 vaccines.

In addition, should they follow the new CDC recommendation, they will receive the flu vaccine every year starting at age 6 month through age 18 years. These vaccines contain a full dose of thimerosal mercury.

*In 1983, before the autism epidemic began, children received 10 vaccinations before attending school and the autism incidence was 1 in 10,000. Today they are receiving 24 vaccines before 1 year and 36 by the time they attend school and the autism rate is now 1 in 150 births.

--Also, keep in mind that for every fully autistic child there are ten times that many with lesser degrees of impairment.

* * * * * *

*Normally, the brains immune system, like the bodys, activates quickly and then promptly shuts off to minimize the bystander damage. Vaccination wont let the microglia shut down. In the developing brain, this can lead to language problems, behavioral dysfunction and even dementia.

In the adult, it can lead to the Gulf War Syndrome or one of the more common neurodegenerative diseases, such as Parkinsons disease, Alzheimers dementia or Lou Gehrigs disease (ALS).

A recent study by the world-renowned immunologist Dr. H. Hugh Fudenberg found that adults vaccinated yearly for five years in a row with the flu vaccine had a 10-fold increased risk of developing Alzheimers disease. He attributes this to the mercury and aluminum in the vaccine. Interestingly, both of these metals have been shown to activate microglia and increase excitotoxicity in the brain.

*You must keep in mind that "health authorities" urge the elderly to get the flu vaccine each and every year. This will keep the microglia in a primed and even activated state continuously. Recently, neurologists announced that the incidence of neurodegenerative disease had been grossly underestimated and that neurological diseases of aging were increasing at a frightening rate. They have no explanation.

Over the last three decades the number of elderly receiving yearly flu vaccines has risen from 20% before 1980 to over 60% today.

If this were not depressing enough, now the public health authorities and medical specialty societies are adding a whole new set of vaccines for those above 50 years of age, including the pneumococcal and meningiococcal vaccines. What is being completely ignored by the promoters of these vaccines is the effect of multiple doses of immune adjuvant that accompany each of these vaccines.

* * * * * *

*Universal Health Care May Increase Vaccine Danger

While a number of people and even physicians, think they desire a universal health care system (a euphemism for socialized medicine), here is something to consider. The government will use access to health care as a way to mandate vaccinations for all Americans. Those who refuse any of the mandated vaccines will be denied access to health care, meaning you will not be able to see a doctor or enter a hospital or clinic.

All federal programs will have completion of vaccine mandates as a requirement. This could be linked to social security, food stamps, housing subsidy programs and other such federal programs. Remember, they use such tactics now for access to schools and daycare centers. One may even have to prove that they have had all their required vaccinations before they can use public transportation, such as busses, trains and airplanes.

Health: The Battle Over Milk - A Health Freedom Issue

2008-05-17T19:40:00.001-07:00

Raw Milk

Now, you might say, "Why would anyone want to drink raw milk? What's the big deal?"

Humble dairy cows were major contributors in helping the United States of America grow into a great nation. Raw milk and dairy foods supported people in becoming healthy and strong. The commerce of this country developed upon the foundation of small family farms and their dairy cattle.
. . . and more

For the rest of this posting, please go to the Food, Glorious Food blog here. Including my personal milk story, and a ton of information about the truth when it comes to milk, and Milk: Nature's Finest Health Food.

V: Climate: Putting Carbon Back Where It Belongs - In the Earth

2008-05-17T19:39:00.000-07:00

(For links to more in-depth information about Global Warming and related issues, go to the bottom of this posting.)

Everyone who cares about the planet and is worried about global warming needs to see this! Here is the EASIEST way to address global warming. Take carbon from the air and put it back into the Earth. How? With plants, primarily GRASS! Plants consume carbon dioxide (CO2) from the air, put oxygen (O2) back into the air, and produce plant material, including roots. When the roots decay, the carbon stays in the earth to improve the soil. If left to decay on the ground, plant stems, branches, leaves, etc. also build the soil. It's an all-around gain.

Maybe this is the ONLY thing that will work in the short time we have left to lower atmospheric CO2 back to pre-industrial levels.

Finding new energy sources is, of course, a very high priority. REDUCING the carbon which has already been released into the atmosphere back down to below 350 ppm (parts per million) is a huge challenge, since we are already at 455e (e=ppm of CO2 plus equivalents) and rising.

(For links to more in-depth information about Global Warming and related issues, go to the bottom of this posting.)

With grass plus grazing animals, we could do it!

One of the most effective ways of sequestering carbon from the atmosphere back into the ground is through pasture GRASS that is used as a food source for ruminant animals, like cows. What makes the difference is properly MANAGING where the livestock graze.
(For more about the importance and value of COWS, see blog postings about Raw Milk.)

Over 50% Comes From Atmospheric Carbon

Here is an excerpt from the article at the end of this posting from Mongabay.com. He is saying that over half the physical material of a tree, comes from carbon in the atmosphere, not from the soil. Presumably, the same is true with grass.

Mongabay: How does one restore carbon to the Earth?
Lovell: By actively mimicking nature and thereby allowing natural cycles to reinvigorate. Arid and semi-arid grazing lands co-evolved with massive herds of grazing animals that were kept bunched up by the presence of pack-hunting predators. When humans removed these predators and fenced in the animals we severely disrupted this natural behaviour leading directly to desertification and massive release of soil carbon into atmospheric circulation. The process that actually removes CO2 from atmospheric circulation is photosynthesis. A simple question for anyone — think of the biggest plant you have ever seen — it is probably a huge tree more than 50 metres tall, 10 metres around and weighing hundreds of tonnes. You can walk up to this tree and hit it — it is solid. Where did the material come from to make this tree? Far too many people answer — "from the ground the tree is growing in". The truth is that over 50% of the solid "thumpable" bit of the tree came directly out of the atmosphere as CO2. While a tree is much more visible than grass, the result is the same.

Go to the Soil Carbon Case Studies powerpoint presentation. It is a fabulous illustration of how this works and what is possible. Even desert land CAN be restored to productivity. Water supplies CAN be increased. Wildlife CAN return. At the same time, livestock businesses CAN be INCREASINGLY profitable, producing HEALTHIER ANIMALS and HEALTHIER FOOD for people.

Below the Soil Carbon information is the Mongabay.com article
Sandra

http://www.soilcarbon.com.au/

The Solution That Offers Immediate Impact on Global Warming

THE PROBLEM: An increase in carbon dioxide levels in the air, contributing to global warming.

THE SIMPLE SOLUTION: Put the carbon back in the earth where it belongs. Degraded soils can store up to 5 times more organic carbon in their surface layers than they currently hold if the soil management approach changes. Through the application of these types of management methods, Soil Carbon Australia can make an impact on global warming.

THE NATURAL SOLUTION: Carbon is naturally sequested in topsoil via biological processes surrounding actively growing roots of pasture grasses and cereals. Encouraging these processes is cheap, efficient, and ecologically beneficial.

THE ACHIEVABLE SOLUTION: Soil carbon levels can be increased by adopting forms of carbon farming, including time-controlled grazing management, pasture cropping and biologically beneficial farming practices.

Soil Carbon Case Studies
The following are actual Soil Carbon case studies and further information.

Please note: File sizes may take some time to download on dial-up connections.
Slideshow is available in other languages from soilcarbon.com.au.

PDF in English (1.7Mb)
PPS Slideshow in English (3.4Mb)
________

Image and text excerpted from the article below from Mongabay.com. The article uses images and information from Soil Carbon.

This simple picture says it all if we allow the grasses to express themselves to the stage shown on the right they absorb CO2 from atmospheric circulation and turn it into plant material. We then manage our grazing animals to eat the grass down to the level somewhere between the middle 2 grass plants. At this point the reduced leaf mass is unable to support the large root mass, and so the plant sloughs off the now excess root material (carbon). The plant then commences to regrow but critically it regrows using carbon absorbed by photosynthesis, not the carbon it previously sloughed off. Repeat this process and you in essence "pump" CO2 out of the atmosphere and store it underground.

Restoring soil carbon can reverse global warming, desertification and biodiversity loss

Restoring the ability of soil to store carbon by promoting native grasses and vegetation can help reverse global warming, desertification and biodiversity loss, says an Australian researcher.

Land use change — including deforestation, bush fires, and soil degradation — accounts for roughly 20 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, but land management practices can be used to reduce emissions. While reforestation and avoided deforestation have garnered a lot of attention of late, restoration of other forms of vegetation can dramatically increase the capacity of degraded landscapes to store carbon.

Tony Lovell of Soil Carbon P/L in Australia estimates that by actively supporting regrowth of vegetation in damaged ecosystems, billions of tons of carbon dioxide can be sequestered from the atmosphere.

In February 2008, Lovell discussed the potential of soil carbon restoration.

Mongabay: What are the advantages of increasing the capacity of soil to store carbon?
Lovell:

In arid and seasonally dry areas, continuous grazing creates disasters like that on the left. Returning to herding-style management with long recovery periods between grazings heals the land (right)

We are not so much increasing the capacity of soil to store carbon as restoring its ability to store carbon. The result of conventional agricultural practices such as artificial fertilizing, ploughing, stubble burning, bare fallows, etc is to run down the organic matter in the soil, and it is this organic matter that is the source of stored soil carbon. The main advantages in direct global warming terms (sources/sinks) of restoring soil’s ability to store carbon are that it is immediate, massive and involves capturing excess CO2 from atmospheric circulation. There are additional huge benefits in terms of water retention, drought tolerance, biodiversity increase, cost decreases, etc as well. The immediacy is a result of using the natural biological process of photosynthesis — as the grasses and other plants grow they absorb C02 each and every day. The massive capacity is simple mathematics.

Determining how much carbon dioxide (CO2) can physically be consumed from the atmosphere?

LEFT: This river in Zimbabwe used to flow year-round. Then overgrazing by wandering livestock bared much of the soil in the surrounding area. Today the river flows only as flash floods following heavy rains. Biodiversity loss is severe, livestock are starving, and most wildlife has disappeared. RIGHT: This nearby river had similar problems. It now has water year-round, and flows during most of the year. Drought is rare, biodiversity is increasing, and wildlife has reappeared in large numbers. Soil Carbon P/L notes that capturing just 1 mm more rain per year means: 1 liter more usable water per square meter; 10,000 liters more water per hectare; 1,000,000 liters more water per square kilometer; Less drought, because more water stays in the soil to recharge rivers, springs, and wells; and more forage, because plants can also use that water.

As the planet has 7.8 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide in circulation for each 1 ppm of atmospheric CO2, and there are 5 billion hectares of inappropriately managed or unmanaged, desertifying savannahs on the Earth (which on empirical evidence we contend to be the case), the question that should sensibly be asked is: How much carbon dioxide would be absorbed if policies were put in place (in Australia and elsewhere) that caused the focus of on-ground management to be deliberately directed towards the widespread consumption of cyclical GHGs within the currently under-utilised savannah lands?

Consumption of CO2 per hectare
One hectare is 10,000 sq. metres. If a hectare of soil 33.5 cm deep, with a bulk density of 1.4 tonnes per cubic metre is considered, there is a soil mass per hectare of about 4,700 tonnes.

If appropriate management practices were adopted and these practices achieved and sustained a 1% increase in soil organic matter (SOM)6, then 47 tonnes of SOM per hectare will be added to organic matter stocks held below the soil surface

This 47 tonnes of SOM will contain approximately 27 tonnes of Soil Carbon (ie 47 tonnes at 58% Carbon) per hectare

In the absence of other inputs this Carbon may only be derived from the atmosphere via the natural function known as the photo-synthetic process. To place approximately 27 tonnes of Soil Carbon per hectare into the soil, approximately 100 tonnes of carbon dioxide must be consumed out of the atmosphere by photosynthesis

A 1% change in soil organic matter across 5 billion hectares will sequester 500 billion tonnes of physical CO2

Converting global Soil Carbon capacity to ppm of atmospheric GHGs

Every 1% increase in retained SOM within the topmost 33.5 cm of the soil must capture and hold approximately 100 tonnes per hectare of atmospheric carbon dioxide (the variability in the equation being due only to the soil bulk density). We submit that under determined, appropriate management, that this is readily achievable within a very few years

For each 1% increase in SOM achieved on the 5 billion hectares there will be removed 64 ppm of carbon dioxide from atmospheric circulation (500,000,000,000 tonnes CO2 / 7,800,000,000 tonnes per ppm = 64 ppm).

Soil Organic Matter is the plant material released into the soil during the natural phases of plant growth. It includes root material sloughed off below the soil surface and plant litter carried into the soil by microbes, insects and rainfall

Soil Carbon is the elemental carbon contained within Soil Organic Matter (SOM).

One tonne of CO2 contains 12/44 units of carbon (ie 0.27 tonnes of carbon per tonne of CO2.). Therefore 27 tonnes of carbon sequesters 27/0.27 = 100 tonnes CO2 (rounded). NB Carbon atomic weight 12, oxygen atomic weight 16 ie CO2 = 12+(16+16) = 44

The global opportunity and numbers

TOP: This cattle ranch in Sonora, Mexico, is typical of hundreds of millions of hectares of grazing land in arid and seasonally dry areas worldwide. BOTTOM: This is the neighboring ranch, La Inmaculada. The ranch is in the same area; has the same rainfall, same soils, and same plant species. The pictures were taken on the same day and La Inmaculada actually has more cattle than the drier ranch. The only difference between the two is management

It appears that the pre-industrial level of atmospheric carbon dioxide was 280ppm, and that globally we are now at 455ppm, and heading towards 550ppm. To get from 550ppm back to 280ppm, 270ppm must be removed. Globally, a 4.2% increase in SOM would potentially reverse the expected situation. In any case, any form of determined management will substantially reduce the now crippling legacy loadings in the atmosphere.

Mongabay: How does one restore carbon to the Earth?
Lovell: By actively mimicking nature and thereby allowing natural cycles to reinvigorate. Arid and semi-arid grazing lands co-evolved with massive herds of grazing animals that were kept bunched up by the presence of pack-hunting predators. When humans removed these predators and fenced in the animals we severely disrupted this natural behaviour leading directly to desertification and massive release of soil carbon into atmospheric circulation. The process that actually removes CO2 from atmospheric circulation is photosynthesis. A simple question for anyone — think of the biggest plant you have ever seen — it is probably a huge tree more than 50 metres tall, 10 metres around and weighing hundreds of tonnes. You can walk up to this tree and hit it — it is solid. Where did the material come from to make this tree? Far too many people answer — "from the ground the tree is growing in". The truth is that over 50% of the solid "thumpable" bit of the tree came directly out of the atmosphere as CO2. While a tree is much more visible than grass, the result is the same.

The global opportunity and numbers

This simple picture says it all — if we allow the grasses to express themselves to the stage shown on the right they absorb CO2 from atmospheric circulation and turn it into plant material. We then manage our grazing animals to eat the grass down to the level somewhere between the middle 2 grass plants. At this point the reduced leaf mass is unable to support the large root mass, and so the plant sloughs off the now excess root material (carbon). The plant then commences to regrow but critically it regrows using carbon absorbed by photosynthesis, not the carbon it previously sloughed off. Repeat this process and you in essence "pump" CO2 out of the atmosphere and store it underground.

Mongabay: What does Soil Carbon Australia offer?
Lovell: Our main focus is on raising awareness of the important role soil carbon plays in mitigating global warming, and ideally on having it recognized as a tradeable item under any global emissions trading scheme. This will dramatically change the incentives that farmers respond to and thus bring about a massive positive change in agricultural practices.

Mongabay: Where are you working?
Lovell: We are based in Australia, and have colleagues in the USA, New Zealand, Spain, England, South Africa and South America.

Mongabay: Have you looked at the potential to earn carbon credits for sequestration?
Lovell: Yes — it is widely recognized and accepted that soil carbon sequestration works — the only questions are ones of measurement, monitoring and verification (MMV). We as a society have dealt with these MMV issues in regards to afforestation and deforestation so should be able to do so with regards to soil carbon.

Mongabay: Are you familiar with "terra preta" soils in the Amazon? If so, how does your process compare with this form of soil carbon?
Lovell: "terra preta" is probably the best example of just what we are talking about — a carbon rich, biologically active soil created as a result of appropriate human management. In the 5 billion hectares we want to bring attention to the results will not be as dramatic due to the lower rainfall and inherently poorer quality of the soils themselves, but the results will be significant and well worthwhile.
__________________________________

For more information:

-- Read the latest reports on global warming here: Is Global Warming for Real?

-- www.eatwild.com

-- www.sustainabletable.org

-- www.holisticmanagement.org

-- stockmangrassfarmer.net

-- www.westonaprice.org

-- Go to www.factoryfarm.org to learn more about confinement animal feeding operations (CAFOs). Be sure to watch The Meatrix.

-- Learn more about Monsanto. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Monsanto%27s+harvest+of+fear&btnG=Google+Search

Monsanto's Harvest of Fear

Monsanto's Harvest of Fear By Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele Vanity Fair. May 2008 Issue. Monsanto already dominates America's food chain with its genetically modified seeds ...

-- Read about the Clintons and their ties to Monsanto at Our Food, Monsanto & the Clintons.

Climate: Is Global Warming for Real?

2008-05-17T19:35:00.003-07:00

(For links to more in-depth information about Global Warming and related issues, go to the bottom of this posting.)

How many hurricanes, floods, droughts and famines does it take to get people to acknowledge that climate change is happening and do something? Evidence of warming is happening all over the planet. We humans need to start taking responsibility for repairing the damage that we have created.

THERE IS HOPE! We CAN turn things around - before it is too late.

My mother, Carolyn Lee has been compiling information about this for many years. She has put this together for you. Educate yourself, and pass it on.

To learn about Soil Carbon as a way to start addressing the climate crisis, go to this posting.
Sandra

Is Global Warming for Real??

by Carolyn Lee

May 20, 2008

Find out for yourself! Don't take my word for it! But don't take the Bush administration's word for it either.

Climate Ark

The best source I have found for ongoing, worldwide news coverage about climate change and global warming is climateark.org, the website of Dr. Glen Barry, a truly dedicated human being. Visit the site regularly for news of the latest scientific findings.

- How people in other countries are already being impacted by the problem.
- What other countries are doing, or are not doing, to reduce their contribution to the planet's CO2 burden.
- The dedicated individuals and groups around the world who are working collectively to save our home from ruin.

Carbon Equity Reports
Read two reports which were prepared by Friends of the Earth for the government of Australia. Read Dr. James E. Hansen's latest papers on desirable CO2 targets. All are quite long and very detailed. Consider making hard copies to review for further study. Until you are familiar with this material, you cannot claim that you know much about global warming!

http://www.carbonequity.info/docs/arctic.html
The big melt: lessons from the Arctic summer of 2007

http://www.carbonequity.info/climatecodered/index.html

http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/

April 2008: Tipping point: Perspective of a climatologist (530 kB PDF). Introductory chapter to the book State of the Wild 2008-2009 from the Wildlife Conservation Society.

April 2008: Target CO₂: Where should humanity aim?, and Target CO₂: Supporting material. Draft of submitted paper. (Note: Final draft, supercedes versions circulated in March.)

If you are a supporter of Ron Paul, as I am, you know how absolutely frustrating it has been to see him ignored, trivialized, and even ridiculed by the mainstream media. Here we have a truly patriotic and learned man, a person of great integrity, and he's shoved by the wayside!

Now imagine you're a climate scientist like Dr. James Hansen. How frustrating must it be for him, and the thousands of other scientists like him worldwide, to know that we are reaching -- and even surpassing -- these major tipping points, decades sooner than we expected to... but the media won't give the story the attention it deserves?! What's going on?

Aha!, the light bulbs go on! Is there a pattern here? You bet there is! The powers-that-be have a vested interest in keeping the system going, exactly as it currently exists, just as they have a vested interest in keeping Ron Paul out of the White House. They have absolutely no intention of reducing our reliance on the fossil fuels they own and control. After all, isn't that why we're in Iraq? Isn't that why the next prize to be fought over is Iran, with its huge oil and natural gas deposits?

People, please don't sit around and wait for the media, the government, or the other three candidates, who have ties to the fossil fuel and nuclear power industries, to give you the real skinny on global warming. It ain't gonna happen! Find out the truth for yourself. Do your homework. Global warming is very real and coming at us like a freight train. And the people of the United States are totally unprepared for it, because it is at the very bottom of the list of the Bush administration's priorities.

A comment is in order here about John McCain's supposedly "green" position on the environment. Since war is the most useless, wasteful, and destructive of all human activities, I am hereby declaring that a hawkish McCain presidency would be an unmitigated disaster for our precious planet. Why do you think the U.S. emits 25% of the world's greenhouse gases? How much of that is emitted by the gigantic military/industrial complex in its insane desire for "empire"? And it's not just the enormous amounts of fuel used by our military personnel in those 130 countries! It's also all the fossil fuels consumed in the design, manufacture, and maintenance of weapons systems, aircraft, tankers, etc., etc., etc. that really adds up!

As Ron says, it's pure insanity for us to bomb roads and bridges, and entire cities into oblivion, in Iraq, then turn around and pay millions of dollars to re-build those same bridges, roads, and cities. I ask you, how much more fossil fuel does that waste?!

So, Dr. Paul is actually the "greenest" of all the presidential hopefuls, because he is the only true PEACE CANDIDATE in the race. He's the only one advocating a humble foreign policy and non-intervention. He's the only one who wants to bring the troops home from 130 countries. He's the only one who would not wage a pre-emptive war.

Ron Paul would be the planet's choice for President of the United States!!

Spread the word!!
____________

To learn about Soil Carbon as a way to start addressing the climate crisis, go to this posting.

For more information:

-- Read the latest reports on global warming here: Is Global Warming for Real?

-- www.eatwild.com

-- www.sustainabletable.org

-- www.holisticmanagement.org

-- stockmangrassfarmer.net

-- www.westonaprice.org

-- Go to www.factoryfarm.org to learn more about confinement animal feeding operations (CAFOs). Be sure to watch The Meatrix.

-- Learn more about Monsanto. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Monsanto%27s+harvest+of+fear&btnG=Google+Search

Monsanto's Harvest of Fear

Monsanto's Harvest of Fear By Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele Vanity Fair. May 2008 Issue. Monsanto already dominates America's food chain with its genetically modified seeds ...

-- Read about the Clintons and their ties to Monsanto at Our Food, Monsanto & the Clintons.

V: The Stark Truth About Immigration

2008-05-16T17:17:00.004-07:00

EXCELLENT VIDEO! You will never view the immigration issue the same again.

This shows the long term effects of our CURRENT immigration policy. Imagine how it would look if the North American Union becomes a reality, and people from south of the border are free to come to the U.S. (or what used to be the U.S.).

If you want to take action regarding immigration, go to NumbersUSA.com website. From there it is very easy to send faxes to your Congressional representatives regarding immigration issues and bills.
Sandra

Immigration Gumballs
Posted May 2nd, 2008
This is a MUST SEE video for anyone interested in the immigration debate, whether you are a citizen, an illegal alien or a Congressman. This clip from the longer video, Immigration by the Numbers, features Roy Beck demonstrating the catastrophe of the huge numbers of both legal and illegal immigration by Third World people into the modern nations. He uses standard statistics and simple gumballs to show this disaster in the making.

V: Republic or Democracy? State Controlled or Free Market?

2008-05-16T14:42:00.000-07:00

There are two videos linked to from here. The second video discusses the issues of people feeling disempowered to be able to make a difference in their government. What is power? How can we overthrow power? How do we acquire power and use it to defend our liberties? What is Collectivism?? The video provides valuable education.

Republic or Democracy?

This fascinating video educates us about the definitions of a wide variety of terms: forms of government, economic structures, and more. It informs from a relatively neutral perspective, creating a positive experience and UNDERSTANDING.

The Constitution Gives the People FREEDOMS and LIMITS the Government

Our country was created to be a Republic which was governed according to the Constitution. The video describes what the United States of America IS and what it IS NOT, according to the Constitution. The Constitution gives the people Freedoms and Limits the government. Look how far we have strayed from that.

Watching this, I learned the difference between Democracy and Republic as forms of government. What does freedom really mean?

What is currently operating in the United States is an Oligarchy, with an elite Group ruling the people.

I learned that Communism is actually a form of Capitalism! Every economic system is actually a form of Capitalism. Learn the differences between monopolistic, state-controlled and free market economic systems.

Enjoy learning through watching this video.

From the person who sent this to me. "Watch this story of America that you never got in government school. Feel good about your country. Have hope for America. We can and must do it."
Sandra

Overview of America - Public Service - DVD

John McManus narrates a moving tribute to America and discusses the history of what makes America great, and how only we, as informed citizens, can keep the timeless concepts of Americanism alive in our Constitutional Republic.

What form of government would you prefer?
______________

Here is the second video.

Freedom Force International - G. Edward Griffin
This is the first of three videos. Access the others from YouTube.

V$$FedWar: Who Profits? War,Inflation,Bank Failures . . . ?

2008-05-15T09:24:00.003-07:00

The following video clearly explains how seemingly diverse and unrelated events are actually very much connected. Worldwide events are carefully manipulated by a few individuals.

Monopoly Men (below) is the most informative video I have seen on the shadowy figures who own the Federal Reserve and their plans for world domination. Learn about the role the Rothschild family plays in all of this intrigue. Learn who the Bilderbergers are, and about the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission.

Learn who profits from perpetual war.

Something I have not seen conveyed before is the very important role played by the mainstream media in keeping all of this information from the public. And the media's role in the election of particular individuals to the office of U.S. President, so that they may then further the agenda of these power-hungry people.

Wind forward to current time, and evidence that the media meddle in the current presidential campaign by unfairly representing and misrepresenting the various candidates. The media have been caught actively sabotaging Ron Paul's presidential campaign. Why? Because he would not continue the unpublished yet pervasive support that our country has given for so long to these big-money interests. That would really screw up their plans and profits, so everything possible is done to keep people from learning the truth. Go to the blog entry and video about this.

War and Inflation

At the bottom of this blog posting is an excellent article, dated June 9, 2008, War and Inflation. It explains how, without central banks like the Federal Reserve, most wars would not be possible. THE U.S. WOULD NOT HAVE WAR, IF WE DIDN'T HAVE THE FEDERAL RESERVE! The article describes the role of central banks in World War I, Hitler and WW II, and now Iraq. Please go to the end of this posting for this article.

Here is the last paragraph from the article. "It comes down to this. If you hate war, oppose the Fed. If you hate violations of your liberties, oppose the Fed. If you want to restrain despotism, restrain the Fed. If you want to secure freedom for yourself and your descendants, abolish the Fed."

(A note from the article about the Iraq war: "In the entire run-up to war . . . despite a $200 billion deficit, a $9 trillion debt, $5 trillion in outstanding debt instruments held by the public, a federal budget of $3 trillion, and falling tax receipts in 2001, Bush contemplated a war that has cost $525 billion dollars -- or $4,681 per household. . . . And those are government figures; the actual cost of this war will be far higher -- perhaps $20,000 per household.")

As I add things to this posting, it is becoming quite extensive.

Here is a link to a posting about a June 11 article about a CIA ex-administrator who reveals the corruption of the Bush administration and the military industrial complex.

Here is a link to a posting about the Pentagon's massive spending and power.

Here is a link to a fascinating audio Who Are the Bilderbergers?
Sandra
_____________
Would you like facts about the Federal Reserve from the mouth of one of its own officers?

Video Interview of an Officer of the Federal Reserve

Below the Monopoly Men video is Meet the Federal Reserve, a video recorded in May 2008, of a reporter actually getting answers to questions from an officer of the Federal Reserve of Chicago. Fascinating!

The guy actually says that yes, the Federal Reserve is a private bank. That and much more. I'm very amazed that this officer actually said all of this, on video. (Trivia note. Did you know that our money is toxic? When the Fed shreds old bills, they are considered toxic waste.)
Sandra
___________
Now to the video that puts all the pieces together.

Federal Reserve Bank -
Monopoly Men: The Distant Murmuring of a Secret Government

Actor Dean Stockwell hosts the video, starting off with the following:
"Is there a secret history of the United States intentionally hidden by the mainstream media? Could there be a secret society of
fat money businessmen whose agenda has been the cause of every major war and economic depression? Is there a shadowy elite gently pulling the strings of our world, to bring about their own self-serving political program?"

Watch the video. It is shorter than some of the videos about the Fed that have been posted here. Only 47 minutes. It is a very well spent hour. Educate yourself!
___________

Meet the Federal Reserve

In this video, Gary Franchi of Republic Magazine goes to the 44th Annual Conference on Bank Structure and Competition in Chicago. He asks Ben Bernanke, Chairman of the Federal Reserve some questions and is completely ignored.

He then has a private meeting with Jerry Nelson, Corporate Communications, of the Federal Reserve, who proceeds to answer all of Franchi's questions!! Watch it. 26 minutes.

Meet the Federal Reserve (0:26:38)

_________

War and Inflation
Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr., June 9, 2009
http://mises.org/story/3010 (mises.org is an excellent website. Ludwig von Mises was one of the major proponents of the Austrian school of economics. If we were to follow this economic model, we would have vastly improved economic health.)

[This talk was delivered at the Future of Freedom Foundation's conference on "Restoring the Republic: Foreign Policy and Civil Liberties," on June 6, 2008, in Reston, Virginia.]

"This institution is the very mechanism by which the dreams of both the fanatical Right and the fanatical Left come true."

The US central bank, called the Federal Reserve, was created in 1913. No one promoted this institution with the slogan that it would make wars more likely and guarantee that nearly half a million Americans will die in battle in foreign lands, along with millions of foreign soldiers and civilians.

No one pointed out that this institution would permit Americans to fund, without taxes, the destruction of cities abroad and overthrow governments at will. No one said that the central bank would make it possible for the United States to be at large-scale war in one of every four years for a full century. It was never pointed out that this institution would make it possible for the US government to establish a global empire that would make imperial Rome and Britain look benign by comparison.

You can line up 100 professional war historians and political scientists to talk about the 20th century, and not one is likely to mention the role of the Fed in funding US militarism. And yet it is true: the Fed is the institution that has created the money to fund the wars. In this role, it has solved a major problem that the state has confronted for all of human history. A state without money or a state that must tax its citizens to raise money for its wars is necessarily limited in its imperial ambitions. Keep in mind that this is only a problem for the state. It is not a problem for the people. The inability of the state to fund its unlimited ambitions is worth more for the people than every kind of legal check and balance. It is more valuable than all the constitutions every devised.

The state has no wealth that is its own. It is not a profitable enterprise. Everything it possesses it must take from society in a zero-sum game. That usually means taxes, but taxes annoy people. They can destabilize the state and threaten its legitimacy. They inspire anger, revolt, and even revolution. Rather than risk that result, the state from the Middle Ages to the dawn of the central-banking age was somewhat cautious in its global ambitions simply because it was cautious in its need to steal openly and directly from the people in order to pay its bills.

To be sure, it doesn't require a central bank for a state to choose inflation over taxes as a means of funding itself. All it really requires is a monopoly on the production of money. Once acquired, the monopoly on money production leads to a systematic process of depreciating the currency, whether by coin clipping or debasement or the introduction of paper money, which can then be printed without limit. The central bank assists in this process in a critical sense: it cartelizes the banking system, the essential conduit by which money is lent to the public and to the government itself. The banking system thereby becomes a primary funding agency to the state, and, in exchange for its services, the banking system is guaranteed against insolvency and business failure as it profits from inflation. If the goal of the state is the complete monopolization of money under an infinitely flexible paper-money system, there is no better path for the state than the creation of a central bank. This is the greatest achievement for the victory of power over liberty.

The connection between war and inflation, then, dates long before the creation of the Federal Reserve. In fact, it dates to the founding itself. The fate of the Continental currency during and after the Revolutionary War, for example, was a very bad omen for our future, and the whole country paid a very serious price. It was this experience that later led to the gold clause in the US Constitution. Except for the Hamiltonians, that entire generation of political activists saw the unity of freedom and sound money, and regarded paper money as the fuel of tyranny.

Consider Thomas Paine:

Paper money is like dram-drinking, it relieves for a moment by deceitful sensation, but gradually diminishes the natural heat, and leaves the body worse than it found it. Were not this the case, and could money be made of paper at pleasure, every sovereign in Europe would be as rich as he pleased…. Paper money appears at first sight to be a great saving, or rather that it costs nothing; but it is the dearest money there is. The ease with which it is emitted by an assembly at first serves as a trap to catch people in at last. It operates as an anticipation of the next year's taxes.

But the wisdom of this generation, attacked by Lincoln, was finally thrown out during the Progressive Era. It was believed that an age of scientific public policy needed a scientific money machinery that could be controlled by powerful elites. The dawn of the age of central banking was also the dawn of the age of central planning, for there can be no government control over the nation's commercial life without first controlling the money. And once the state has the money and the banking system, its ambitions can be realized.

Before the creation of the Federal Reserve, the idea of American entry into the conflict that became World War I would have been inconceivable. In fact, it was a highly unpopular idea, and Woodrow Wilson himself campaigned on a platform that promised to keep us out of war. But with a money monopoly, all things seem possible. It was a mere four years after the Fed was invented under the guise of scientific policy planning that the real agenda became obvious. The Fed would fund the US entry into World War I.

It was not only entry alone that was made possible. World War I was the first total war. It involved nearly the whole of the civilized world, and not only their governments but also the civilian populations, both as combatants and as targets. It has been described as the war that ended civilization in the 19th-century sense in which we understand that term. That is to say, it was the war that ended liberty as we knew it. What made it possible was the Federal Reserve. And not only the US central bank; it was also its European counterparts. This was a war funded under the guise of scientific monetary policy.

Reflecting on the calamity of this war, Ludwig von Mises wrote in 1919

One can say without exaggeration that inflation is an indispensable means of militarism. Without it, the repercussions of war on welfare become obvious much more quickly and penetratingly; war weariness would set in much earlier.

There is always a price to be paid for funding war through the central bank. The postwar situation in America was a classic case. There was inflation. There were massive dislocations. There was recession or what was then called depression, a direct result of capital dislocation that masked itself as an economic boom, but which was then followed by a bust. The depression hit in 1920, but it is not a famous event in United States economic history. Why is that? Because the Federal Reserve had not yet acquired the tools to manufacture an attempt to save the economy. Instead, neither the Fed nor Congress nor the president did much of anything about it — a wholly praiseworthy response! As a result, the depression was brief and became a footnote to history. The same would have happened in 1930, had Hoover not attempted to use the government as the means of resuscitation.

"The dawn of the age of central banking was also the dawn of the age of central planning, for there can be no government control over the nation's commercial life without first controlling the money."

Sadly, the easy recovery of 1920–1922 tempted the central bank to get back into the business of inflation, with the eventual result of a stock market boom that led to bust, then depression, and finally the destruction of the gold standard itself. FDR found that even fascist-style economic planning and inflation could not restore prosperity, so he turned to the ancient method of looking for a war to enter. Here is where the history of the United States and the Fed intersects with the tragic role of the German central bank.

The German government also funded its Great War through inflation. By war's end, money in circulation had risen fourfold. Prices were up 140%. Yet, on international exchange, the German mark had not suffered as much as one might expect. The German government looked at this with encouragement and promptly attempted to manufacture a complete economic recovery through inflation. Incredibly, by 1923, the mark had fallen to one-trillionth of its 1914 gold value. The US dollar was then equal to 4.2 trillion marks. It was an example of currency destruction that remains legendary in the history of the world — all made possible by a central bank that obliged the government and monetized its war debt.

But did people blame the printing press? No. The popular explanation dealt directly with the Treaty of Versailles. It was the harsh peace imposed by the allies that had brought Germany to the brink of total destruction — or so it was believed. Mises himself had written a full book that he hoped would explain that Germany owed its suffering to war and socialism, not Versailles as such. He urged the German people to look at the real cause and establish free markets, lest imperial dictatorship be the next stage in political development. But he was ignored.

The result, we all know, was Hitler.

Turning to Russia, the untold truth about the Bolshevik revolution is that Lenin's greatest propaganda tool involved the suffering of the Russian people during World War I. Men were drafted and killed at a horrific level. Lenin called this capitalist exploitation, based on his view that the war resulted from capitalist motives. In fact, it was a foreshadowing of the world that socialism would bring about, a world in which all people and all property are treated as means to statist ends. And what made the prolongation of the Russian role in World War I possible was an institution created in 1860 called the State Bank of the Russian Empire — the Russian version of the Fed.

The Russian war itself was funded through money creation, which also led to massive price increases and controls and shortages during the war. I'm not of the opinion, unlike the neocons, that the Russian monarchy was a particularly evil regime, but the temptation that the money machine provided the regime proved too inviting. It turned a relatively benign monarchy into a war machine. A country that had long been integrated into the worldwide division of labor and was under a gold standard became a killing machine. And as horrific and catastrophic as the war dead were for Russian morale, the inflation affected every last person and inspired massive unrest that led to the triumph of Communism.

At this juncture in history, we can see what central banking had brought to us. It was not an end to the business cycle. It was not merely more liquidity for the banking system. It was not an end to bank runs and bank panics. It certainly wasn't scientific public policy. The world's major economies were being lorded over by money monopolies, and the front men had become some of the worst despots in the history of the world. Now they were preparing to fight each other with all the resources they had at their disposal. The resources they did not have at their disposal they would pay for with their beloved machinery of central banking.

In wartime, the printing presses ran overtime, but with a totalitarian level of rationing, price controls, and all-around socialization of resources in the whole of the Western world, the result of inflation was not merely rising prices. It was vast suffering and shortages in Britain, Russia, Germany, Italy, France, Austria-Hungary, the United States, and pretty much the entire planet.

"One can say without exaggeration that inflation is an indispensable means of militarism."

– Ludwig von Mises

So we can see here the amazing irony of central banking at work. The institution that was promoted by economists working with bankers, in the name of bringing rationality and science to bear on monetary matters, had given birth to the most evil political trends in the history of the world: Communism, socialism, Fascism, Nazism, and the despotism of economic planning in the capitalist West. The story of central banking is one step removed from the story of atom bombs and death camps. There is a reason the state has been unrestrained in the last 100 years, and that reason is the precise one that many people think of as a purely technical issue that is too complicated for mere mortals.

Fast-forward to the Iraq War, which has all the features of a conflict born of the power to print money. There was a time when the decision to go to war involved real debate in the House of Commons or the US House of Representatives. And what was this debate about? It was about resources and the power to tax. But once the executive state was unhinged from the need to rely on tax dollars and did not have to worry about finding willing buyers for its unbacked debt instruments, the political debate about war was silenced.

In the entire run-up to war, George Bush just assumed as a matter of policy that it was his decision alone whether to invade Iraq. The objections by Ron Paul and some other members of Congress and vast numbers of the American population were reduced to little more than white noise in the background. Imagine if he had to raise the money for the war through taxes. It never would have happened. But he didn't have to. He knew the money would be there. So despite a $200 billion deficit, a $9 trillion debt, $5 trillion in outstanding debt instruments held by the public, a federal budget of $3 trillion, and falling tax receipts in 2001, Bush contemplated a war that has cost $525 billion dollars — or $4,681 per household. Imagine if he had gone to the American people to request that. What would have happened? I think we know the answer to that question. And those are government figures; the actual cost of this war will be far higher — perhaps $20,000 per household.

Now, when left-liberals talk about these figures, they like to compare them with what the state might have done with these resources in terms of funding health care, public schools, Head Start centers, or food stamps. This is a mistake because it demonstrates that the Left isn't really providing an alternative to the Right. It merely has a different set of priorities in how it would use the resources raised by the inflation machine. It's true that public schools are less costly in terms of lives and property than war itself. But the inflation-funded welfare state also has a corrosive effect on society. The pipe dream that the inflation monster can be used to promote good instead of evil illustrates a certain naïveté about the nature of the state itself. If the state has the power and is asked to choose between doing good and waging war, what will it choose? Certainly in the American context, the choice has always been for war.

"The story of central banking is one step removed from the story of atom bombs and death camps."

It is equally naïve for the Right to talk about restraining the government while wishing for global war. So long as the state has unlimited access to the printing press, it can ignore the pleas of ideological groups concerning how the money will be spent. It is also very silly for the Right to believe that it can have its wars, its militarism, its nationalism and belligerence, without depending on the power of the Federal Reserve. This institution is the very mechanism by which the dreams of both the fanatical Right and the fanatical Left come true.

The effect of the money machine goes well beyond funding undesirable government programs. The Fed creates financial bubbles that lead to economic dislocation. Think of the technology bubble of the late 1990s or the housing bubble. Or the boom that preceded the current bust. These are all a result of the monopolization of money.

These days, the American consumer has been hit very hard with rising prices in oil, clothing, food, and much else. For the first time in decades, people are feeling this and feeling it hard. And just as in every other inflation in world history, people are looking for the culprit and finding all the wrong ones. They believe it is the oil companies who are gouging us, or that foreign oil dealers are restricting supply, or that gas station owners are abusing a crisis to profit at our expense.

I wouldn't entirely rule out the possibility that price controls are around the corner. When Nixon imposed them in 1971, neither he nor his advisors believed that they would actually result in controlling inflation. Rather, the purpose was to redirect the target of public anger from the government and its bank over to retailers, who would become scapegoats. In this sense, price controls do work. They make people believe that the government is trying to lower prices while the private sector is attempting to raise them. This is the real political dynamic at work with price controls.

The question is whether you will be taken in by these tactics. It is long past time for us to take note that the cause of the real trouble here is not the manufacturers, or even the war as such, but the agency that has been granted a legal right to counterfeit at will and lower the value of the currency while fueling every manner of statist scheme, whether welfare or warfare. We need to look at the Fed and say, this is the enemy.

Note that the Federal Reserve is not a political party. It is not a recognized interest group. It is not a famed lobby in Washington. It is not really even a sector of public opinion. It seems completely shielded from vigorous public debate. If we truly believe in liberty and decry the leviathan state, this situation cannot be tolerated.

"So long as the state has unlimited access to the printing press, it can ignore the pleas of ideological groups concerning how the money will be spent."

I say to the sincere Right, if you really want to limit the state, you will have to give up your dreams of remaking the world at the point of a gun. Wars and limited government are impossible. Moreover, you must stop ignoring the role of monetary policy. It is a technical subject, to be sure, but one that we must all look into and understand if we expect to restore something that resembles the American liberty of the founders.

I say to the sincere Left, if you really want to stop war and stop the spying state, and put an end to the persecution of political dissidents and the Guantánamo camps for foreign peoples, and put a stop to the culture of nationalism and militarism, you must join us in turning attention to the role of monetary policy. The printing presses must be unplugged. It's true that this will also hit programs that are beloved by the Left, such as socialized health care and federalized education programs. But so long as you expect the state to fund your dreams, you cannot expect that the state will not also fund the dreams of people you hate.

And let me say a few words to libertarians, who dream of a world with limited government under the rule of law, a world in which free enterprise reigns and where the state has no power to interfere in our lives so long as we behave peacefully. It is completely absurd to believe that this can be achieved without fundamental monetary reform. And yet, until the most recent Ron Paul campaign — and aside from Murray Rothbard and the 26-year-long work of the Mises Institute — I don't recall that libertarians themselves have cared much about this issue at all.

In 1983, the Mises Institute held a large academic conference on the gold standard, and we held it in Washington, D.C. (There were scholarly papers and Ron Paul debated a Fed governor. Ron won.) Even back then, I recall that D.C. libertarians ridiculed us for holding such a meeting to talk about the Fed and its replacement with sound money. They said that this would make the Mises Institute look ridiculous, that we would be tarred with the brush of gold bugs and crazies. We did it anyway. And all these years later, the book that came out of that conference remains a main source for understanding the role of money in the advance of despotism or resistance to it, and a blueprint for the future.

Of course the Austrian tradition fought paper money and central banking from the beginning. Menger was an advocate of the gold standard. Böhm-Bawerk actually established it as finance minister to the Habsburg monarchy. Mises's book on the topic from 1912 was the first to show the role of money in the business cycle, and he issued dire warnings about central banking. Hayek wrote powerfully against the abandonment of gold in the 1930s. Hazlitt warned of the inevitable breakdown of Bretton Woods and advocated a real gold standard instead. And Rothbard was a champion of sound money and the greatest enemy the Fed has ever had.

But generally, I've long detected a tendency in libertarian circles to ignore this issue, in part for precisely the reasons cited above: it is not respectable.

Well, I will tell you why this issue is not considered respectable: it is the most important priority of the state to keep its money machine hidden behind a curtain. Anyone who dares pull the curtain back is accused of every manner of intellectual crime. This is precisely the reason we must talk about it at every occasion. We must end the conspiracy of silence on this issue.

I was intrigued at how Ron Paul, during his campaign, would constantly bring up the subject. Most politicians are out to play up to their audiences, so they say things that people want to hear. I promise you that early in the campaign, no one wanted to hear him talk about the Federal Reserve. But he did it anyway. He worked to educate his audiences about the need for monetary reform. And it worked. For the first time in my life, there is a large and very public movement in this country to take this topic seriously.

Monetary economist Joseph Salerno was called the other day by C-Span, which wanted to interview him on television on the need to restore gold as the basis of our currency. As I watched this excellent interview, I was struck by what a great triumph it truly is for liberty that this topic is again part of the national debate. In the 19th-century, this was a topic on everybody's mind. It can be again today, provided we do not eschew the truth in the formation of our message.

It might be said that advocating privatization is politically unrealistic, and therefore a waste of time. What's more, we might say that by continuing to harp on the issue, we only marginalize ourselves, proving that we are on the fringe. I submit that there is no better way to ensure that an issue will always be off the table than to stop talking about it.

Far from being an arcane and anachronistic issue, then, the gold standard and the issues it raises get right to the heart of the current debate concerning the future of war and the world economy. Why do the government and its partisans dislike the gold standard? It removes the discretionary power of the Fed by placing severe limits on the ability of the central bank to inflate the money supply. Without that discretionary power, the government has far fewer tools of central planning at its disposal. Government can regulate, which is a function of the police power. It can tax, which involves taking people's property. And it can spend, which means redistributing other people's property. But its activities in the financial area are radically curbed.

Think of your local and state governments. They tax and spend. They manipulate and intervene. As with all governments from the beginning of time, they generally retard social progress and muck things up as much as possible. What they do not do, however, is wage massive global wars, run huge deficits, accumulate trillions in debt, reduce the value of money, bail out foreign governments, provide endless credit to failing enterprises, administer hugely expensive and destructive social insurance schemes, or bring about immense swings in business activity.

State and local governments are awful and they must be relentlessly checked, but they are not anything like the threat of the federal government. Neither are they as arrogant and convinced of their own infallibility and indispensability. They lack the aura of invincibility that the central government enjoys.

It is the central bank, and only the central bank, that works as the government's money machine, and this makes all the difference. Now, it is not impossible that a central bank can exist alongside a gold standard, a lender of last resort that avoids the temptation to destroy that which restrains it. In the same way, it is possible for someone with an insatiable appetite for wine to sit at a banquet table of delicious vintages and not take a sip. Let's just say that the existence of a central bank introduces an occasion of sin for the government. That is why under the best gold standard, there would be no central bank, gold coins would circulate as freely as their substitutes, and rules against fraud and theft would prohibit banks from pyramiding credit on top of demand deposits.

"Until the most recent Ron Paul campaign, I don't recall that libertarians themselves have cared much about this issue at all."

So long as we are constructing the perfect system, all coinage would be private. Banks would be treated as businesses: no special privileges, no promises of bailout, no subsidized insurance, and no connection to government at any level.

This is the free-market system of monetary management, which means turning over the institution of money entirely to the market economy. As with any institution in a free society, it is not imposed from above and dictated by a group of experts, but is the de facto result that comes about in a society that consistently respects private-property rights, encourages enterprise, and promotes peace.

It comes down to this. If you hate war, oppose the Fed. If you hate violations of your liberties, oppose the Fed. If you want to restrain despotism, restrain the Fed. If you want to secure freedom for yourself and your descendants, abolish the Fed.

Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. is president of the Ludwig von Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, editor of LewRockwell.com, and author of Speaking of Liberty. See his Mises.org archive.

This talk was delivered at the Future of Freedom Foundation's conference on "Restoring the Republic: Foreign Policy and Civil Liberties," on June 6, 2008, in Reston, Virginia.
_________

Now to the blog about the media blackout of Ron Paul's campaign.

#1 on the NYT Bestseller List!!

2008-05-01T07:56:00.001-07:00

Ron Paul #1 on New York Times Best Seller List

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

May 7, 2008

ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA – Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul’s newest book, “The Revolution: A Manifesto”, is number one on the New York Times Best Sellers list for May 18th, 2008. The ranking is yet another of the many successes Dr. Paul has had during his presidential candidacy spreading his message of personal freedom and constitutional government.

Upon its official release on April 30th, “The Revolution: A Manifesto” was the number one bestseller on Amazon.com and remains the number one bestseller in political books.
_______

Read Sandra's review of the book, posted to this blog.

Access to Information About Ron Paul Continues to be Blocked

Throughout the campaign, mainstream media coverage of Ron Paul has been severely limited, unreasonably so. Considering how extraordinarily popular Paul is, this indicates how threatened the Establishment is by Ron Paul and what he represents - truth, freedom, and the Constitution. Big business interests and the political mainstream that continues to support these interests are doing everything in their power to prevent people from becoming educated about what life in the United States should really be like.

Ron Paul's book is truly an extraordinary and valuable educational volume, one which every American would do well to read. It shows you how our government should be operating, and how the way our government is operating is absolutely not consistent with the foundations upon which our country was built.

Because of this, the Establishment is trying to block access to the book.

Go to your local bookstores and ASK FOR THE BOOK! Let them know there is demand!

Here is one person's experience, followed by my friend's comment about this, . . .

I went to Barnes & Noble in Lacey yesterday to get Ron's book. After about a 30 minute search by an employee they finally found the ONE copy they had -- tucked back in the far corner of the store. Of course Hillary's and McCain's and all the other political personages' books were prominently displayed at the FRONT of the store! I said incredulously, "ONE copy?" And their reply was, "Yes, aren't you lucky to get it?"

Well, at least I have it! But people ought to know to go in and ASK for it! Then maybe they'll wake up and order it, and make it findable.

Just want you to be aware of more conspiracy against Ron Paul and now it is the book stores. Be sure to go into your bookstore and ask for his Book. I ask the question then who owns Barnes and Noble..... maybe there are links back to the powers who control this country??????

V: THE REVOLUTION: A MANIFESTO - Book by Ron Paul

2008-04-29T13:09:00.000-07:00

There is actually some good news out there. Ron Paul's newly released book is #1 on Amazon!

Update: It is #1 on the NYT Bestseller List too!

Below, please read Sandra's personal review of the book, see Ron Paul talking about it, and read other book-related material.

Video from Ron Paul: The Revolution: A Manifesto - NYT Bestseller List Debut #7
Posted April 30th, 2008

Ron Paul's Book is #1 on Amazon! Let's keep it there!

The book is also now officially a New York Times bestseller!!! It is at # 7 on the list, which was tracking the previous week.

Here is the link to the original video. Ron Paul's statement about the book is included below in this posting. Ron Paul has a new YouTube video channel here: RonPaulforLiberty

Check it out!!!

Spread the word! Please view it, rate it and favorite it!

Michael Nystrom, Editor, www.dailypaul.com
Sandra made modifications to Nystrom's posting, primarily shortening it. For the complete posting, go to the original.
__________

My own copy of the book was ordered over a month ago and arrived April 28.

Sandra's update and book review, dated May 1, 2008
Ron Paul's book is FANTASTIC! It is highly relevant to citizens of both the United States and of Canada.

To Do List for Yourself and for Everyone:
Get the book and read it. Even read it multiple times.
Tell other people about it.
Gift the book to your family and friends. It's a worthwhile investment in both their future and your own.
Gift the book to libraries and schools, even multiple copies. Gift the book to the schools' history or social studies teachers.
Suggest to high schools and middle/junior high schools that they read this book in all American History and civics classes.

Sandra's Personal Commentary
Ron Paul's book sat unopened on the table for a couple of days. Last night, I began reading it, because I felt that I should, like reading it was a responsibility. And this morning, I had to force myself to put it down, or I would have continued reading all day.

Over the past several months of taking in Ron Paul videos, speeches, and campaign-related writings, I have come to deeply respect this man. He is extraordinarily well educated and articulate. He speaks about the Constitution, freedom, and the benefit of the People, rather than about himself. He is always respectful, straightforward, and consistent. How refreshing that is in a politician!

Because I believe Ron Paul to be absolutely capable of leading this country I have, for the first time in my life, become politically active. I take action to make a difference, including through this blog, and I believe that positive change is possible.

Reading the book is further expanding my belief in Ron Paul. The book format enables Dr. Paul to convey understanding of the issues in much greater depth. He provides perspective on the issues that spans from the days of the drafting of the U.S. Constitution to current times. Quotes from the Founding Fathers powerfully illustrate relevant points.

Technically, this is a campaign book, as Ron Paul discusses issues relevant to the 2008 Presidential campaign. But he wrote the book with the intention that it be relevant for many, many years. The education available here is timeless.

"I Hate History!" -- Transformed
Ever since 5th grade, I have said about myself, "I hate history." Had Ron Paul taught my social studies classes, had he authored my history textbooks, I would have been a true lover of history. Reading Ron Paul is engaging, both providing depth of understanding and drawing forth passion about the future of our country. I plan to purchase more of his books -- and he is a prolific writer and educator, to the tremendous benefit of our society. What a transformation for me, an ex-avoider of history and politics!

Ron Paul as a Founding Father
I now think of Ron Paul as being one of the Founding Fathers. It just happens that the beginning of his term of service was delayed 30+ years. In fact, his serving the United States of America today is of so much greater importance now than it would have been in the 1700's. In the 1700's there were many men speaking these truths. Today, Ron Paul's is a lone, yet confident and steady voice.
Sandra
_______

Ron Paul's book signing was the biggest ever at a major New York bookstore. Go to the original web posting to read some of the longer comments from people who were there. People really love this man and what he stands for.

Yesterday's Book Signing at Borders
April 28, 2008
Good news to report out of New York at yesterday’s book signing, where the books were sold out before Dr. Paul even showed up! The Borders staff informed our campaign that the biggest signing they ever had at that location, which is one of their flagships, was New York Giants star running back Tiki Barber, and then they mentioned that Dr. Paul’s signing was even bigger!

Thanks to all who came out to the event!
_________

The Revolution: A Manifesto
March 3rd, 2008

Every election cycle we are treated to candidates who promise us "change," and 2008 has been no different. But in the American political lexicon, "change" always means more of the same: more government, more looting of Americans, more inflation, more police-state measures, more unnecessary war, and more centralization of power.

Real change would mean something like the opposite of those things. It might even involve following our Constitution. And that’s the one option Americans are never permitted to hear.

Today we are living in a fantasy world. Our entitlement programs are insolvent: in a couple of decades they will face a shortfall amounting to tens of trillions of dollars. Meanwhile, the housing bubble is bursting and our dollar is collapsing. We are borrowing billions from China every day in order to prop up a bloated overseas presence that weakens our national defense and stirs up hostility against us. And all our political class can come up with is more of the same.

One columnist puts it like this: we are borrowing from Europe in order to defend Europe, we are borrowing from Japan in order to keep cheap oil flowing to Japan, and we are borrowing from Arab regimes in order to install democracy in Iraq. Is it really “isolationism” to find something wrong with this picture?

With national bankruptcy looming, politicians from both parties continue to make multi-trillion dollar promises of “free” goods from the government, and hardly a soul wonders if we can still afford to have troops in – this is not a misprint – 130 countries around the world. All of this is going to come to an end sooner or later, because financial reality is going to make itself felt in very uncomfortable ways. But instead of thinking about what this means for how we conduct our foreign and domestic affairs, our chattering classes seem incapable of speaking in anything but the emptiest platitudes, when they can be bothered to address serious issues at all. Fundamental questions like this, and countless others besides, are off the table in our mainstream media, which focuses our attention on trivialities and phony debates as we march toward oblivion.

This is the deadening consensus that crosses party lines, that dominates our major media, and that is strangling the liberty and prosperity that were once the birthright of Americans. Dissenters who tell their fellow citizens what is really going on are subject to smear campaigns that, like clockwork, are aimed at the political heretic. Truth is treason in the empire of lies.

There is an alternative to national bankruptcy, a bigger police state, trillion-dollar wars, and a government that draws ever more parasitically on the productive energies of the American people. It’s called freedom. But as we’ve learned through hard experience, we are not going to hear a word in its favor if our political and media establishments have anything to say about it.

If we want to live in a free society, we need to break free from these artificial limitations on free debate and start asking serious questions once again. I am happy that my campaign for the presidency has finally raised some of them. But this is a long-term project that will persist far into the future. These ideas cannot be allowed to die, buried beneath the mind-numbing chorus of empty slogans and inanities that constitute official political discourse in America.

That is why I wrote this book.

Ron Paul: Let's Take the Country by Storm - Again
by Ron Paul | April 30, 2008

Today is an exciting day for our campaign and our movement: my new book, The Revolution: A Manifesto, is officially released.

Although a short book, it is the product of many years of thought and action. It is a defense of the principles to which you and I have devoted our lives.

My friends are calling it "Ron Paul's legacy."

These principles - individual liberty, sound money, the Constitution, and the foreign policy of the Founding Fathers - have had no home in American politics for a very long time. With The Revolution: A Manifesto, I'm letting the establishment know we're not going away.

Finally, Americans can hear and judge these great American principles for themselves, instead of through an unfriendly media filter. And they can learn once and for all that they need not be satisfied with the phony choices the system offers them every four years. Another way really is possible.

Two days ago I did a book signing in New York at the Borders on Wall Street. All 530 copies had been sold before I even arrived.

They had underestimated you again.

Imagine the attention our cause and our principles could attract with a fantastic opening day today, with people marching into bookstores across the country for their copies. If it should become a publishing phenomenon, The Revolution: A Manifesto can fuel our revolution for a long time to come. You can make that happen.

I hope you enjoy this book, which was a real labor of love for me. Please spread the word.

And may the future be ours.

Ron Paul
_________

April 30, 2008

Paul No. 1 on Amazon.com

Posted: 06:00 PM ET

Paul's book is No. 1 on Amazon.com

(CNN) — Ron Paul’s loyal supporters helped him set campaign fundraising records and capture more delegates during his presidential run than some of his high-profile Republican rivals. They even managed to briefly shut down Nevada’s GOP convention earlier this month over a rules change controversy.

Now they’ve taken his latest book to the top of the Amazon.com bestseller list.

“The Revolution: A Manifesto”, released earlier this month, is currently No. 1 on the Web site’s list of top sellers, besting even Oprah’s latest Book Club selection.

“Despite a media blackout, this septuagenarian physician-turned-congressman sparked a movement that has attracted a legion of young, dedicated, enthusiastic supporters . . . a phenomenon that has amazed veteran political observers and made more than one political rival envious,” boasts the book’s product description, adding: “Candidates across America are already running as ‘Ron Paul Republicans.’”
From: CNN Associate Political Editor Rebecca Sinderbrand

Health: National Animal Identification System -- NO!

2008-02-12T11:20:00.003-08:00

Continuing Limitations on Our Access to Healthy Food

Despite repeated protestations on the part of individual people, governments repeatedly seek to make it difficult and/or impossible for us to get food that is truly supportive of health. The National Animal Identification System (NAIS) is one such system which would have a dramatic influence on the quality of our food supply. Basically, NAIS would require that all livestock, each and every animal, be electronically tagged and tracked by the government. We do not want the government to know everything about what we do and what we own. NAIS is unnecessary and does not enhance the safety of our food supply. In fact, it would result in so much expense and red tape, that it would be virtually impossible for small farmers to continue to exist. Those who support passage of NAIS say that it is voluntary. But once in place, it could all too easily be made mandatory.

We need to prevent the passage of this extraordinarily damaging legislation. Ron Paul is the only Presidential candidate even mentioning this as an issue.

Over the past year, since joining the Weston A. Price Foundation, I have learned a lot about these issues. Through the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund, people are made aware of legislative threats to our access to food, on Federal and State levels. The NAIS is an issue on which a lot of their attention is addressed.

More information below.

Sandra

Summary:

NAIS means more government, more regulations, more fees, more federal spending, less privacy, and diminished property rights. It's exactly the kind of federal program every conservative, civil libertarian, animal lover, businessman, farmer, and rancher should oppose.

by Ron Paul, Dr. May 29, 2006

The House of Representatives recently passed funding for a new federal mandate that threatens to put thousands of small farmers and ranchers out of business. The National Animal Identification System, known as NAIS, is an expensive and unnecessary federal program that requires owners of livestock-- cattle, dairy, poultry, and even horses-- to tag animals with electronic tracking devices. The intrusive monitoring system amounts to nothing more than a tax on livestock owners, allowing the federal government access to detailed information about their private property.

In typical Washington-speak, NAIS is voluntary provided USDA bureaucrats are satisfied with the level of cooperation. Trust me, NAIS will be mandatory within a few years. When was the last time a new federal program did not expand once implemented?

As usual, Congress is spending millions of dollars creating a complex non-solution to a very simple problem. NAIS will cost taxpayers at least $33 million for starters.

Agribusiness giants support NAIS, because they want the federal government to create a livestock database and provide free industry data. But small and independent livestock owners face a costly mandate if NAIS becomes law.

Larger livestock operations will be able to tag whole groups of animals with one ID device. Smaller ranchers and farmers, however, will be forced to tag each individual animal, at a cost of anywhere from $3 to $20 per head. And NAIS applies to anyone with a single horse, pig, chicken, or goat in the backyardno exceptions. NAIS applies to children in 4-H or FFA. Once NAIS becomes mandatory, any failure to report and tag an animal subjects the owner to $1,000 per day fines.

NAIS also forces livestock owners to comply with new paperwork and monitoring regulations. These farmers and ranchers literally will be paying for an assault on their property and privacy rights, as NAIS empowers federal agents to enter and seize property without a warrant-- a blatant violation of the 4^th amendment.

NAIS is not about preventing mad cow or other diseases. States already have animal identification systems in place, and virtually all stockyards issue health certificates. Since most contamination happens after animals have been sold, tracing them back to the farm or ranch that sold them wont help find the sources of disease.

More than anything, NAIS places our family farmers and ranchers at an economic disadvantage against agribusiness and overseas competition. As dairy farmer and rancher Bob Parker stated, NAIS is too intrusive, too costly, and will be devastating to small farmers and ranchers.

NAIS means more government, more regulations, more fees, more federal spending, less privacy, and diminished property rights. Its exactly the kind of federal program every conservative, civil libertarian, animal lover, businessman, farmer, and rancher should oppose. The House has already acted, but theres still time to tell the Senate to dump NAIS. Please call your Senators and tell them you oppose spending even one dime on the NAIS program in the 2007 agriculture appropriations bill.

Keywords: Business, NAIS, Property Rights

What Are the Issues?

V: Energy Independence! Help Make Freedom From Oil a Reality

An Introduction to The Orion Project

The Orion Project Scientists

The Breakthrough Campaign

The Transition

V: Global Warming News & Updates

Global warming potential

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Source: Copyright 2008, ObserverDate: March 16, 2008Byline: Juliette Jowit

Melting mountains a "time bomb" for water shortages

Melting Andean Glaciers Could Leave 30 Million High and Dry

Toasted Bugs? Tropical Insects May Not Thrive in Warming World

Although insects, frogs, lizards and turtles in the tropics are used to hot weather, climate change may prove too much for many species

Source: Copyright 2008, Asia News InternationalDate: April 6, 2008Original URL

Forests Besieged: With Africa Ahead, World Fells Trees at 'Alarming' Rate, Imperiling Climate

Last Updated: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 | 4:08 PM CT CBC News

30.05.2008

New Research Confirms Antarctic Thaw Fears

Climate: Reversing Global Climate Change with Holistic Management

Reversing Global Climate Change with Holistic Management®

Earth’s Breathing System at Risk

The Overlooked, Low-Tech Solution to Climate Change

Biodiversity, Desertification and Global Climate Change are all Interconnected.

How Much Environmental Benefit Can Be Expected from Reversing Desertification?

Healthy Land & CO2

Rangelands

Croplands

The Urgent Need To Reduce Biomass Burning

Cattle, Methane, Myth & Reality

Quotes from Experts about Cattle and the Environment

Seven Things You Can Do To Help

Climate: Grassfarming Can Help to Reverse Global Warming

Grassfarming Benefits the Environment

Keep ‘Em Moving to Reduce Greenhouse Gasses

Long-Lived Cows Reduce Global Warming

Pasture reduces topsoil erosion by 93 percent

The Sierra Club recommends grass-fed beef

"Green grazing" brings back native plants

Lambs control insects and increase crop yield

Grassland may absorb more CO2 than trees

Finishing cattle on pasture may reduce greenhouse gasses

Moderate-intensity grazing encourages plant biodiversity and mimics the natural prairie

Grazing animals make a visible contribution to soil fertility

Increasing pasture land would help reduce global warming

Grazing better for the soil than growing grain

Grazed pasture is the best land use for storing carbon

Mother Nature knows better once again

Growing corn and soy causes six times more soil erosion than pasture

V-Climate: U.N. Blames Cows for Global Warming -- Unjustly!!

A Wiser Perspective on Drugs

Health: Maple Syrup & Baking Soda for Cancer

Health: Mandatory Vaccinations vs. Health Freedom

Health: The Battle Over Milk - A Health Freedom Issue

V: Climate: Putting Carbon Back Where It Belongs - In the Earth

Climate: Is Global Warming for Real?

V: The Stark Truth About Immigration

V: Republic or Democracy? State Controlled or Free Market?

V$$FedWar: Who Profits? War,Inflation,Bank Failures . . . ?

#1 on the NYT Bestseller List!!

V: THE REVOLUTION: A MANIFESTO - Book by Ron Paul

Health: National Animal Identification System -- NO!

Source: Copyright 2008, Observer
Date: March 16, 2008
Byline: Juliette Jowit

Source: Copyright 2008, Asia News International
Date: April 6, 2008
Original URL

Reversing Global Climate Change with Holistic Management^®