DaniMartExtras, Too


REAL NEWS June 04, 2012

Posted by Xaniel777 on June 4, 2012

TODAY’S NEWS : June 04,2012


Murder, Inc: Official Obama Policy


By Stephen Lendman, Contributor
June 2, 2012

Obama’s wars increase body counts daily. New ones planned will add more. Death squads operate in 120 or more countries. So do CIA agents licensed to kill.

US citizens may be targeted at home or abroad. No one anywhere is safe.

Summary judgment means no arrests. No Miranda rights. No due process. No trial. Just a bullet, bomb or slit throat. It’s official Obama policy. Diktat authority affords justice to no one ordered killed.

On May 29, The New York Times upped the stakes. Its article headlined “Secret ‘Kill List’ Proves a Test of Obama’s Principles and Will,” saying:

Obama “placed himself at the helm of a top secret ‘nominations’ process to designate terrorists for kill or capture, of which the capture part has become largely theoretical.”

In other words, he appointed himself judge, jury and executioner. Despot authority is official administration policy. Diktats decide who lives or dies.

Anyone called Al Qaeda or accused of terrorist connections gets marked for death.

What “moral and legal conundrum” could he face, asked The Times. None whatever. On day one in office, he spurned rule of law principles.

He adopted George Bush’s ideology. His predecessor called “the Constitution….just a G-damn piece of paper.”

Obama feels the same. He’s comfortable with “unitary executive” authority. It puts him above the law. Chalmers Johnson called it “a ball-faced assertion of presidential supremacy….dressed up in legalistic mumbo jumbo.”

International law is quaint and out-of-date, he believes. Diktat authority replaced it. The former constitutional law professor abandoned what he taught. He campaigned against war and torture. In office, he exceeded the worst of his predecessor.

He usurped the power of life and death, including against US citizens. He’s got final “kill list” authority.

Policy prioritizes killing by drones, death squads, or other means. Only eliminating America’s enemies matter. Whether real or imagined makes no difference.

The more removed, the greater the number replacing them. According to national security adviser Thomas Donilon:

“He is determined that he will make these decisions about how far and wide these operations will go. His view is that he’s responsible for the position of the United States in the world. He’s determined to keep the tether pretty short.”

His “aggressive counterterrorism record” baffles supporters and critics alike. Secrecy obscures policies. Shadow war actions aren’t publicized. Deadly force is approved “without hand-wringing.” So is fork-tongued politics, torture and other lawless practices.

For Obama, killing Americans comes “easy.” Waging war on Islam is policy. So is take no prisoners. Counterterrorism is cover for wholesale or retail slaughter. Collateral deaths don’t matter.

US Pakistan ambassador, Cameron Munter, complained about CIA drone strikes. He told colleagues “he didn’t realize his main job was to kill people.”

Obama and counterterrorism adviser John Brennan collaborate on who lives or dies. Both match each other’s bloodthirstiness. “Just war” thinking overrides rule of law principles and moral considerations.

“Drones have replaced Guantanamo as the recruiting tool of choice for militants.” America needs enemies to justify war. Avoiding peace and stability is policy.

Former national intelligence director Dennis Blair said:

“The steady refrain in the White House was (targeted killing) is the only game in town – reminded me of body counts in Vietnam.”

Unanswered is when will killing stop? Who’ll denounce what’s unconscionable? Who in government believes right over wrong matters most? No one around Obama dares. His administration doesn’t tolerate justice, morality, and rule of law principles.

On matters of war and peace, only imperial interests matter. Ends justify means.

“A phalanx of retired generals and admirals stood behind Mr. Obama on the second day of his presidency.”

They “provid(ed) martial cover as he signed several executive orders to make good on campaign pledges. Brutal interrogation techniques were banned, he declared. And the prison at Guantánamo Bay would be closed.”

Guantanamo remains open. Other torture prisons expanded. Every major promise made was broken. Wars rage without end. New ones are planned. Killing like sport continues daily.

Unlike voters who believed in him, he “was never carried away by his own rhetoric.” Lying came easily. So did going rogue. Amoral realpolitik defines his thinking.

Morality has no place in government. Nor do human rights and other democratic values. Former White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel calls it “cold-blooded (thinking) about the self-interests of your nation.” Body counts don’t matter, just objectives.

From inception, Obama’s doctrine featured human sacrifice for unchallenged dominance. Winning alone matters. Anything goes is policy. He has final say.

In 2008, campaign national security strategists advised “pragmatism over ideology.” Urging it “reinforced the president’s instincts.”

Policy rules out nothing. Rhetoric woos supporters. Major objectives aren’t deterred. They include war, torture, rendition, military commissions, indefinite detentions, and targeted killings.

Nothing stands in his way. He’s ruthless. His public persona hides it. Those around him know better.

Openly he urges sparing innocent lives. Privately he doesn’t give a damn. Under Bush, Iraq and Afghanistan rules of engagement were kill every military aged man in sight. Obama changed nothing.

Mostly civilians die. Policies don’t distinguish militants from noncombatants. In Libya alone, NATO killed over 100,000. Killer gangs took many more lives. No one kept count or cared.

Obama’s thinking reflects it. Pragmatism alone matters. Humanity is someone else’s problem. Everyone targeted in strike zones is fair game. Being there means they’re “up to no good,” even women and children.

An unnamed official said “Al Qaeda is an insular, paranoid organization – innocent neighbors don’t hitchhike rides in the back of trucks headed for the border with guns and bombs.”

The same goes for residents where militants are targeted. Being there justifies indiscriminate killing.

Official counts distort reality. Combatants alone are killed, they claim. Independent analysts say as many as 50 civilians die for every militant. In combat theaters everywhere, ordinary people suffer most.

Former intelligence and government officials admit it. According to one:

“It bothers me when they say there were seven guys, so they must all be militants. They count the corpses” but don’t care who they are.

National security advisor Donilon says Obama “is a president who is quite comfortable with the use of force on behalf of the United States.”

Forgotten is candidate Obama’s pledge to end America’s wars. On October 27, 2007, he said:

“I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out (of Afghanistan and Iraq) by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do.”

“I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to (these wars). You can take that to the bank.”

He also promised hope, change, a new era of peace, upholding democratic values, closing Guantanamo in one year, ending torture, no more illegal spying and detention without trial, “a new era of openness,” equitable immigration reform, keeping the Internet free and open, negotiations with Syria, Iran and other countries targeted for regime change, and much more.

In office, he broke every major promise made. Loyal constituents were betrayed. Imperial and corporate considerations were prioritized. Popular needs went begging.

Arrogance, unaccountability, and contempt for democratic values define his presidency. Rule of law principles don’t matter. Take no prisoners is prioritized. If reelected, imagine what’s ahead in a second term.


Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. His new book is titled How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion and Class War

Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.







Five Land Mines of Disinformation In The Global Infowar Against Bilderberg


From The Excavator


June 02, 2012

1. Bilderberg Is Just A Talking Shop.

The record of history proves to the contrary. Bilderberg is the West’s foremost policy hub.

As Paul Joseph Watson writes, “Bilderberg is not merely a talking shop but an active consensus-making forum for people in positions of power.”

Bilderberg has been instrumental in setting up the European Union, ensuring that the U.S. dollar remains the world reserve currency, controlling the global oil market, and constructing America’s pro-terrorist Middle East policy.

In the past, Bilderberg attendees have recommended that Washington and London prop up Islamic extremists to take down secular nationalists in Middle Eastern countries and intimidate Russia.

And there are so many world events that Bilderberg conspirators have caused, from the false flag 9/11 events to the Federal Reserve-engineered global financial crisis. 

2. Secrecy Is Necessary For The Survival of Civilization And The Planet.

Secrecy and power don’t produce good results for the vast majority of humanity.

Those who wield power secretly for their own private ends are tyrants.

And they deserve the fate of tyrants. Secrecy is not necessary for the survival of the human species, human civilization, and the planet.

It is only necessary for the survival of the corrupt transnational military-industrial-bankster complex that has taken Washington and the Western world hostage.

The Bilderberg Group is not interested in saving the Earth, but in saving themselves.

Allowing them to exercise power behind closed doors for their own benefit will lead to the death of civilization. 

3. Bilderberg Is Good, And The People Are Bad.

The Bilderbergers are not the elite of the Earth, they are the scum of the Earth. They are dishonourable thieves and liars.

They have no sense of morality, honour, and humanity. 

The degenerative Western corporate “elite” don’t want to raise the people out of the darkness, out of poverty, and out of the gutter, but keep them down there like rats and shove mud in their mouth and souls.

The belief that the stupid masses deserve to be impoverished, cheated, deceived, and destroyed is demonstrative of a cowardly, criminal, and hateful state of mind.

Bilderberg is a low-life group of criminals who hate the free market, the rule of law, the spirit of independence, human enlightenment, the spread of evolutionary knowledge, truth, peace, kindness, generosity, and all of the human values that most of us cherish as the bedrock of a decent, positive, and successful society. 

4. The Bilderberg World Coup Plotters Have Already Won So There Is No Point In Protesting. 

There is this idea that: “What’s done is done. Everything is written in stone. An authoritarian and technocratic global government is inevitable. This is evolution. This is about survival.

The powers that be are going to win, so why should I risk my life and career exposing them and protesting what they do in secret? I can’t make any difference.”

This is a coward’s answer to tyranny. New media journalists and activists have made a huge dent in the “invisible” image of the Bilderberg group. They are no longer invisible.

Before, these snakes plotted mankind’s destruction in the dark, but dedicated activists have exposed their evil war on humanity and that is a positive development that cannot be denied and dismissed.

Now, the world can’t say, “We didn’t know.” Thanks to politically conscious activists and new media journalists, the world has been warned of the threat to humanity and civilization posed by the Bilderberg oligarchy. 

5. People Who Protest Against Bilderberg Are Not Heroes, But “Conspiracy Theorists.”

The Huffington Post’s article on the 2012 Bilderberg conference called,“Bilderberg 2012: Global Leaders Gather For Shadowy Conference At Virginia Hotel,” began with the ritualistic and propagandistic label “Conspiracy theorists.”

This label is used by the official media organs of the totalitarian governments of the West to erase the existence of millions of people and deny them their humanity. But the trick of words no longer works.

People are waking up. 9/11 has been exposed as an inside job. The rotten Bilderberg criminals and conspirators have been outed by new media journalists who are live streaming the media revolution and the Bilderberg apocalypse. 

The label “conspiracy theorist” no longer applies to 9/11 truth activists and Occupy Bilderberg protesters. The label “hero” is a more honest description.






“It’s a Trick, We Always Use It.” (calling people “anti-Semitic”)


Uploaded by  on Jul 13, 2009

I’m working on a video about how extreme mainstream media is including the tricks used when covering of key domestic issues like health care.

But this video is a response to the trick repeatedly used against this channel in channel comments.

It’s the the standard tactic of calling someone “anti-Semitic,” and its used to sabotage anyone who speaks out against the US government policy of supporting immoral and illegal Israeli policies which violate basic human rights.

And as you can see, this person suggests using a new word for the same old trick.

Amy Goodman interviews a former Israeli minister and she helps expose this trick used against dissidents, the defamation tactic of calling people “anti-Semitic.”

===================================COMMENT BY : Mike Rivero of WRH.com

Can you imagine some old burned-out Nazi screaming, “You are being an anti-Aryan! Hitler didn’t do anything wrong; you just HATE GERMANS!!!!!”

Silly, isn’t it, yet Israel has gotten away with it for 67 years now!~~ Mike R.





Paralysed rats walk again in Swiss lab study




By Chris Wickham

May 31, 2012

(Reuters) – Scientists in Switzerland have restored full movement to rats paralysed by spinal cord injuries in a study that might eventually be used in people with similar injuries.

Gregoire Courtine and his team at Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne saw rats with severe paralysis walking and running again after a couple of weeks following a combination of electrical and chemical stimulation of the spinal cord together with robotic support.

“Our rats are not only voluntarily initiating a walking gait, but they are soon sprinting, climbing up stairs and avoiding obstacles,” said Courtine, whose results from the five-year study will be published in the journal Science on Friday.

Courtine is quick to point out that it remains unclear if a similar technique could help people with spinal cord damage but he adds the technique does hint at new ways of treating paralysis.

Other scientists agree.

“This is ground-breaking research and offers great hope for the future of restoring function to spinal injured patients,” said Elizabeth Bradbury, a Medical Research Council senior fellow at King’s College London.

But Bradbury notes that very few human spinal cord injuries are the result of a direct cut through the cord, which is what the rats had. Human injuries are most often the result of bruising or compression and it is unclear if the technique could be translated across to this type of injury.

It is also unclear if this kind of electro-chemical “kick-start” could help a spinal cord that has been damaged for a long time, with complications like scar tissue, holes and where a large number of nerve cells and fibres have died or degenerated.

Nevertheless, Courtine’s work does demonstrate a way of encouraging and increasing the innate ability of the spinal cord to repair itself, a quality known as neuroplasticity.

Other attempts to repair spinal cords have focused on stem cell therapy, although Geron, the world’s leading embryonic stem cell company, last year closed its pioneering work in the field.

The brain and spinal cord can adapt and recover from small injuries but until now that ability was far too limited to overcome severe damage. This new study proves that recovery from severe injury is possible if the dormant spinal column is “woken up”.

Norman Saunders, a neuroscientist at the University of Melbourne in Australia, said in an emailed statement reacting to the study that although it remains to be seen whether the technique can be translated to people, “it looks more promising than previously proposed treatments for spinal cord injury”.

Bryce Vissel, head of the Neurodegenerative Diseases Research Laboratory at the Garvan Institute of Medical Research in Sydney, said the study “suggests we are on the edge of a truly profound advance in modern medicine: the prospect of repairing the spinal cord after injury”.

Courtine hopes to start human trials in a year or two at Balgrist University Hospital Spinal Cord Injury Centre in Zurich.

“Our rats have become athletes when just weeks before they were completely paralysed,” he said. “I am talking about 100 percent recuperation of voluntary movement.”

(Editing by Ben Hirschler and Alessandra Rizzo)





Vitamin D and Cancer – Vitamin D Outperforms Pharmaceuticals at Treating Cancer


From PrisonPlanet

Mike Barrett
June 1, 2012

Everyone is deathly afraid of coming down with cancer, yet the very lifestyle that promotes cancer is the most popular.

Cancer has been one of the leading causes of death in the United States, UK, and many other nations for years.

Something is terribly wrong, as the war on cancer is failing miserably.

The use of pharmaceutical drugs is not the answer, and the idea of prevention is seldom voiced.

Luckily, making some dietary changes can reduce your cancer risk significantly.

One example is showcased with research showing that a relationship between vitamin D and cancer exists; raising vitamin D levels can be more effective and much safer than dangerous pharmaceutical drugs and treatments.

It costs a whole lot less as well.

Vitamin D and Cancer

Angus Dalgleish, a consultant medical oncologist residing in a city known as Tooting in south-west London, tests all of his patients for vitamin D levels and prescribes supplements for when the levels are low.

Dalgleish noticed that patients at his clinic at St Georges suffering from melanoma, the deadliest form of skin cancer, almost all were vitamin D deficient.

Not only does the medical oncologist prescribe vitamin D for his melanoma patients, but he also prescribes the vitamin for other patients who are stricken with other types of cancer.

“If we supplement people who are low they may do better than expected. I wouldn’t be a bit surprised if vitamin D turns out to be more useful in improving outcomes in cases of early relapse than drugs costing £10,000 a year,” said Professor Dalgleish.

“I spent a decade studying interferon for which the NHS paid £10,000 annually per patient for years for very little benefit. Vitamin D is much more likely to give a benefit in my view.”

Other research from the University of Leeds showed similar connections between vitamin D and cancer, specifically melanoma.

Patients with the lowest vitamin D levels had the gloomiest outlook and were also 30 percent more likely to suffer from the disease in the future than those with higher vitamin D levels.

At Creighton University in Nebraska, Joan Lappe, a professor of medicine, also noticed a strong link between vitamin D and cancer.

He took note of the vitamin d and cancer relationship when cancer patients who received vitamin d and calcium supplementation increased their survival rates significantly.

Although the trial was originally meant to evaluate the effects of supplements on osteoporosis, this accidental finding led Lappe to examine  the effects of supplements on cancer.

You May Not Be Getting the Vitamin D You Think You Are

Of course, none of this matters if you aren’t giving your body the necessary amount of vitamin D to work with.

Foods fortified with vitamin d contain a synthetic, potentially harmful type of vitamin D called vitamin D2.

Vitamin D2 is both inferior and could be harmful, so you may not want to search for fortified foods like milk and cereal just yet.

Instead of chomping down on fortified foods, consume foods that naturally possess vitamin D such as cod liver oil, eggs, and seafood such as salmon, oysters, catfish, sardines, or shrimp.

However, be careful when consuming fish, as most fish is toxic due to contaminates and chemicals residing in the water.

The best source of vitamin D is the sun, but the amount of vitamin D produced from sun exposure can vary greatly. Getting sun exposure in the summer when the rays are very strong can produce a lot of vitamin D – as much as 10,000 IU’s in just 20-30 minutes (a bit longer for dark skin).

But soaking up the rays in winter months will not produce the same amount as the sun is less powerful.

One last thing to remember is to avoid using sunscreen if possible.

Not only does research show that sunscreen causes cancer, but lathering on sunscreen also compromises your body’s ability to produce vitamin D from UV rays.

Additional sources:

Creighton University

The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition

Vitamin D Association

This post first appeared at Natural Society





Fair Use Notice ):

This web site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance the understanding of humanity’s problems and hopefully to help find solutions for those problems. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. A click on a hyperlink is a request for information. Consistent with this notice you are welcome to make ‘fair use’ of anything you find on this web site. However, if you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. You can read more about ‘fair use’ and US Copyright Law at the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School. This notice was modified from a similar notice at Information Clearing House.} ~~ Xaniel777



Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

%d bloggers like this: