DARPA wants to install transcanial ultrasonic mind control devices in soldiers' helments. These devices are mean to allow soldiers to stimulate certain regions of their brains. It's a Buck Rogers type of proposal. DARPA has been trying to crawl inside the minds of soldiers for a while now. A new ultrasound technology could let them get deeper inside than ever. Working under a DARPA grant, which is a researcher at Arizona State is developing transcranial pulsed ultrasound technology. This could be placed in troops' battle helments, allowing soldiers to manipulate brain functions to boost altertness, relieve stress, or even reduce the effects of traumatic brain injury. Manipulating the brain to enhance warfighting capabilities and maintain mental acuity on the battlefield has long been a topic of interest for DARPA and various military labs. The technology to do so remains limited. Deep brain stimulation (or DBS) requires surgically implanted electrodes to stimulate neural tissues. There is less invasive methods like transcranial magnetic stimulation (or TMS) possess limited reach and low spatial resolution. Dr. William J. Tyler is an assistant professor of life sciences at ASU. He wrote at the DoD's "Armed with Science" blog the following words: "...“To overcome the above limitations, my laboratory has engineered a novel technology which implements transcranial pulsed ultrasound to remotely and directly stimulate brain circuits without requiring surgery. Further, we have shown this ultrasonic neuromodulation approach confers a spatial resolution approximately five times greater than TMS and can exert its effects upon subcortical brain circuits deep within the brain.” This is a development from previously quaint instruments. Tyler's technology is packaged in a warfighter's helment. It can allow soldiers to flip a switch to stimulate different regions of the brains. It can help them relieve battle stress when it's time to get some rest. It can even boost alertness during long periods without sleep. Grunts could even relieve pain from injuries or wounds without resorting to pharmaceutical drugs. More importantly, in the periods after brain trauma ultrasound technology could reduce swelling and metabolic damage that is often the root cause of lasting brain damage. With this technology, a new world comes alive.
Some have criticized Barack Obama's jobs plan even though some parts of the bill is legitimate. The criticism isn't just from the neo-conservatives. President Barack Obama gave a speech on the economy in Cleveland, Ohio. He wanted a pro-middle class plan to not benefit the welath. Some feel that the jobs plan is corporate tax give way instead of direct public job creation. Barack Obama wants to fight for Democrats in the upcoming November election. Some want the corporations to build jobs via tax breaks, but the U.S. banks and the corporation are already sitting on a cash hoard of over $1 trillion. Public works programs and other government job creation is opposed by the President. Obama offered a bald statement of his subordination to big business. “I’ve never believed that government’s role is to create jobs or prosperity,” he said. “I believe it’s the private sector that must be the main engine of our recovery.” That's strange since the public and private sector should create jobs not just the private sector. President Barack Obama wants to allow corporations to deduct from their taxes the full value of new equipment purchases. He also proposed to increase and make permanent a tax credit for corporate research and development. Barack Obama wants to spend $50 billion to fund transportation developement. Some feel that this money is too small to repair the nation's crumbling infrastructure (and it would create already existing funds to benefit private investors in public projects via an infrastructure bank). the recession made 7.6 million jobs lost. It can create thousands of jobs, which is good. Others feel that it doesn't go far enough in totally costing 180 billion dollars. Some feel that the bill won't pass for a long time. Obama claims to favor continuing the tax breaks only for households that earn less than $200,000 a year for an individual or $250,000 for a couple, about 98 percent of all households. But prominent Democrats, including Reid and former Office of Management and Budget head Peter Orszag, have already signaled their support for an extension of the cuts for the 2 percent with incomes above the cut-off levels as well. President Barack Obama legitimately said that the Bush philosophy in the previous 8 years was cutting regulations for special interests, health care costs increasing, wages decreased under certain policies, let corporations run wild. He omits that both parties have had political that have benefited the rich and used deregulation. These policies existed even under the Clinton years. That is why Bush and Obama passed a bailout for WallStreet. He intervened to block legislation that would include certain restrictions on the pay of bank executives. He wants fiscal responsibility, but privatizing Social Security causes fiscal irresponsibility. Barack Obama said that he won't privatize Social Security, but he said that: "...“[O]nce the bipartisan fiscal commission finishes its work,” Obama said, “I will spend the next year making the tough choices necessary to further reduce our deficit and lower our debt.” The National Commission on Fiscal Responsbility and Reform is that commission. This commission on December wants to promote so-called "reforms" of Social Security including reductions in benefits, an increase in the retirement age, and the introduction of private “add-on retirement accounts.” These aren't reforms, but an attack on Social Security. The Republicans are just as bad since they want austerity, the extension of tax breaks for the extremely wealthy and the rejection of any form of assistance to the vast majority of the population. The media is obsessing with deficit spending when some businesses are hoarding money. In reality, both the Democrats and Republicans are committed to making the population foot the full bill for the economic crisis, the bailout of Wall Street, and the cost of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The truth is coming out more and more. The truth can't be stopped.
Scientists seek permanent injunction against Obama's embryonic funding. There is the federal appeals court to overturn the temporary injunction a federal judge put in place against the taxpayer funding of embryonic stem cell reasearch President Barack Obama put in place. 2 scientists are asking the judge to issue a permanent injunction. U.S. district court Judge Royce Lamberth granted a preliminary injunction against the funding and Obama officials appealed his decision. The officials asked to put the injunction on hold on taxpayer dollars can continue to flow to embryonic stem cell research projects while the lawsuit against the order moves ahead. Yesterday, the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington put on hold that injunction while Judge Lamberth reviews the lawsuit itself. “The purpose of this administrative stay is to give the court sufficient opportunity to consider the merits of the emergency motion for stay and should not be construed in any way as a ruling on the merits of that motion,” the appeals court wrote in its decision. Advocates International was part of the legal team that brought the lawsuit. They announced on late Thursday that it has filed a comprehensive summary judgment motion in the federal district court. This included evidentiary declarations by plantiff scientists Dr. James Sherley and Theresa Deisher. The motion asks Judge Lamberth to enter a final declaratory judgment declaring invalid the Obama's administration's controversial guidelines for public funding of embryonic stem cell research. Samuel Casey, the lead attorney for the pro-life legal group, told LifeNews.com, "the summary judgment motion we have filed today demonstrates that plaintiffs are entitled to entry of summary judgment in their favor on their request for declaratory and injunctive relief against the National Institutes of Health Guidelines for Human Stem Cell Research." He said that Barack Obama's actions violate the Dickey-Wickey Amdndment and it was implemented witout observance of procedures required by law. He wants the federal district court to permanently make the government not implement policies related to NIH Guidelines or fund human embryonic stem cell research. Casey said that the motion goes further and asks Judge Lamberth to make it clear to NIH that not only can it not provide further grants for additional embryonic stem cell research with taxpayer dollars, but that scientists who already received, but have not spent, tax dollars should not spend the remainder of the funds until the case is concluded. He mention that he asked the Court to order the government that any NIH grant recipients in possesssion or control of federal funds granted under the Guidelines for human embryonic stem cell research (that any remaining and unspent NIH-granted funds may not be spent on human embryonic stem cell research, but must be returned to NIH to fund lawful research). The parties involved in bringing the lawsuit can file a response to the appeals court's decision to lift the injunction by September 14. The Obama administration can file its response to the plaintiffs by September 20. Dr. James L. Sherley is the former member of the MIT faculty and he's now currently working as a senior scientist at the Boston Biomedical Research Institute. Dr. Theresa Deisher is the founder of AVM Biotechnology. They were the 2 scientists behind the lawsuit. Judge Lamberth in his 15 page decision said that: "...Embryonic stem cell) research is clearly research in which an embryo is destroyed."
He noted, "Embryonic stem cell (ESC) research necessarily depends upon the destruction of a human embryo," and concluded that funding such research violates existing law. He said that his order wouldn't hurt embryonic stem cell researchers because that they have the oppurtunity to fund private funds. Lamberth wrote that there is no after the fact remedy for this injury because the Court cannot compensate plaintiffs for their lost opportunity to recieve funds. The NIH disputes this. Judge Lamberth said that the temporary injunction wouldn't hurt embryonic stem cell researchers since they have teh power to find private funds. Instead, he said the two adult stem cell research scientists are hurt by the movement of the funding to those engage in embryonic research. "There is no after-the-fact remedy for this injury because the Court cannot compensate plaintiffs for their lost opportunity to receive funds," Lamberth wrote. Embryonic stem cell research has yet to help a single patient, unlike adult stem cell research -- which has helped patients with more than 100 diseases and medical conditions and which President Bush supported with hundreds of millions in federal funding. Embryonic stem cells haven't worked in animals. The reason is that the cells once injected cause tumors and are rejected by the immune system. This causes embryonic stem cells can't be safely used in human trials until those problems are corrected. A recent ramussen Report polls finds that 57 percent of Americans oppose the use of taxpayer funds to pay for embryonic stem cell research. So, ESCs are being exposed grealty.
9/11 Truth is still here. There is the ninth anniversary of 9/11. Even 9/11 Commissioners have issues with the current story about how 9/11 went down. The 9/11 Commission co-charis said that the 9/11 Commissioners knew that the military officials misrepsented facts to the Commission. The Commission considered recommending criminal charges for such false statements. 9/11 Commission co-chair Lee Hamiliton said that he don't believe that they got everything correction. The Commission in his mind was set up to fail. People have the right to keep asking questions about 9/11. The truth about 9/11 isn't over in its debate. 9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer said that "...We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting." 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned form the Commission. He said that it's a national scandal. He believed that the investigation is now compromised and the full story about 9/11 should be shown. The White House in his mind wanted to cover up about what occured during 9/11. 9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said that: "...There are ample reasons to supect there may be some alternative to what we outlined in our version...We didn't have access..." He also said that the investigation depended too heavily on the accounts of Al-Qaeda detainees who were physically coerced into talking. John Farmer was the Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission. He led the 9/11 staff's inquiry. He recently said that: "...At some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened”. He also said “I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years…. This is not spin. This is not true.” And he said: “It’s almost a culture of concealment, for lack of a better word. There were interviews made at the FAA’s New York center the night of 9/11 and those tapes were destroyed. The CIA tapes of the interrogations were destroyed. The story of 9/11 itself, to put it mildly, was distorted and was completely different from the way things happened." Intelligence officers questioned the official story of 9/11 as well. The former military analyst and whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg said that there could be a certain 9/11 whistleblower that is far more explosive than the Pentagon Papers. He accused the government of covering up about 9/11. He is open to accept accusations of government involvment in 9/11. The U.S. government did knew of 9/11 style attacks for years. This is why some want a new investigation into 9/11. Raymond McGovern said that the 9/11 Report was a joke. He was a 27 year CIA veteran. He chaired National Intelligence Estimates. He personally gave intelligence briefings to Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush (their Vice Presidents, Secretaries of State, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and many other senior government officials). William Bill Christison said that there is more persuasive evidence that show that the 9/11 attacks are different from what was presented from the 9/11 Commission. Christison was a 29 year veteran of the CIA, a former National Intelligence Officer, and a Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political Analysis. Many intelligence people and CIA people sent a letter to Congress exposing the ommissions, errors, and serious shortcomings from the 9/11 Comission Report. CIA veteran Robert Baer said that evidence points to 9/11 having aspects of being an inside job. The Division Chief of the CIA’s Office of Soviet Affairs, who served as Senior Analyst from 1966 – 1990. He also served as Professor of International Security at the National War College from 1986 – 2004 (Melvin Goodman) said “The final [9/11 Commission] report is ultimately a coverup." Many Congresspeople have doubts on the official story of 9/11. Bob Graham said that a FBI informant hosted and rented a room with 2 "hijackers" in 2000 (and the FBI blocked investigations of this issue). Graham was the co-Chair of the Congressional Inquiry into 9/11. He was the former Head of the Senate Intelligence Committee. U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy said that warnings occured about 9/11 on Bush's watch and why did it allow to happen. Even Ron Paul want a new investigation into 9/11. Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich said we weren't told the total truth on 9/11. Lincoln Chaffee, Mike Gravel, and Jason Chafetz wants to re investigation 9/11. Dan Hamburg (a former U.S. Democratic Congressman) doens't believe in the official story of 9/11. Former U.S. Republican Congressman and senior member of the House Armed Services Committee, and who served six years as the Chairman of the Military Research and Development Subcommittee Curt Weldon has shown that the U.S. tracked hijackers before 9/11, is open to hearing information about explosives in the Twin Towers, and is open to the possibility that 9/11 was an inside job. Edward Peck, Wesley Clark, and others want an investigation into 9/11. If these government officials, politicans, and intelligence agents question the official story of 9/11, we have a right to question it too. That is why 9/11 Truth will never die and it's here to stay. Protesters from various quarters existed in New York to express their views. Yet, we should fight revolving around real issues like the prison system, the war on terror, etc. We should reject the hysteria against Muslim like like the race-baiting rhetoric coming from neo cons.
Some are using the egg recall as an excuse to support the food safety bill of S.510. There is the billion plus egg recall fiasco. It presents some issues in the industrialized, agriculture system. Some want to reform Big Agribusiness to made clean, localized food production possible. Others want to call on Congress to pass legislation that would shift total control of the nation's food supply to Monsanto and various governing bodies. I don't agree with that plan at all. A recent CNN article from the Center for Science in the Public Interest and several other groups allegedly repsenting the victims of the recent salmonella outbreak are calling the U.S. Senator to pass the the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Food Safety Modernization Act–also known as S.510. The proponents of this bill feel that it will regulate and prevent future illness outbreaks (and it will fix the broken food system). The agency doesn't deal with the real problems that cause food contamination. It has a desperate need of major reform and we should have food freedom. S.510 will allow unconstitutional control of the U.S. food supply to multinational corporations and it will force the U.S. to relinquish sovereignity to international governing bodies. Even in the early 1990's, Bill Clinton wanted the HACCP program or the Hazardous Analysis Critical Control Points. It tried to stop meat contamination problems, but it critics said that it made problems worse. Its critics believed that the law made multinational corporatiosn and bureaucrats to control food freedom. It eliminated thousands of local food processors that had been producing clean meat all along. The U.S. House passed the Food Safety Enchancment Bill or HR 2749 as a prescusor to S.510. “If accepted [S.510] would preclude the public’s right to grow, own, trade, transport, share, feed and eat each and every food that nature makes. It will become the most offensive authority against the cultivation, trade and consumption of food and agricultural products of one’s choice. It will be unconstitutional and contrary to natural law, or, if you like, the will of God,” explained Dr. Shiv Chopra, a microbiologist with Health Canada, concerning the bill. According to some reports, the bill contains language that would give Monsanto–in conjunction with the United Nations (UN), the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Trade Organization (WTO)–total control over all food, food production systems, farms and even food and dietary supplements. Food freedom is common worldwide. There is the Codex Alimentarius regulations that threaten to dietary supplements and organic food. Local and organic farming is threatened by the bill. All food production system will be required to register with international mandates. Some transactions involving food could be called illegal smuggling. Some want GM foods as well. S.510 has the blatantly evil National Animal Identification Standard (or NAIS) that registers aminals in the stock. In the event that S.510′s illegitimate “food czar” declares a food “emergency”, all U.S. food facilities and farms will immediately be placed under the control of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Defense. S.510 violates the rule of law and trial rights under the Constitution. Its critics beleive that S.510 will allow violators of the food code will be subjected to corporate tribunals that have unlimited, unchecked power to do as they please. The United States shouldn't be apart of a world government where health freedom is violted. We should have the freedom to choose healthy, clean foods, without the government telling us what to eat totally.
No comments:
Post a Comment