+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 1 4 5 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 100

Thread: Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint!

  1. Link to Post #61
    United States Avalon Member A Voice from the Mountains's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th September 2014
    Location
    Appalachia
    Posts
    1,542
    Thanks
    5,157
    Thanked 7,348 times in 1,426 posts

    Default Re: Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint!

    Quote Posted by Fellow Aspirant (here)
    Hi Voice

    I wonder if you could help me understand what you are driving at by explaining what you mean by "professional".

    B.
    It's just a concept to help distinguish from opinions that may be, for example, more fuzzy, vague, very loosely formulated, etc. I don't mean that you actually have to be a medical professional of course, and honestly I tend not to trust the medical profession anyway since it was taken over by the Rockefellers by the 1950's. I must not be alone in that either since "alternative medicine" has exploded as much as it has in recent years, along with the organic food market, and a general backlash against companies like McDonalds and Monsanto.

    I could go on and on about all the reasons why I have learned to distrust the medical industry in the US but I figure that you have probably already made up your own mind about it one way or the other, and there's not much that trading academic papers will change when there are so many of them that reach so many contradictory conclusions on so many different subjects, and which represent so many different interests.

    But back to your question, when you use words like "repugnant" to describe people you disagree with, there is obviously quite a bit of negative emotional charge there. As all over the place as medical papers are, even they try to avoid that kind of language in order to maintain their credibility. Maybe your problem with Mike is more political than it has anything to do with health stuff but I actually take him seriously, and also Dr. Mercola, Dr. Group, and several others who are into things like maintaining health through whole foods, regular detoxing of the kidneys and liver, and all that kind of stuff that conventional doctors don't seem to be too interested in until you're already dying.

  2. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to A Voice from the Mountains For This Post:

    BMJ (11th April 2018), DNA (11th April 2018), edina (11th April 2018), Foxie Loxie (11th April 2018), KiwiElf (11th April 2018), we-R-one (11th April 2018)

  3. Link to Post #62
    United States Avalon Member we-R-one's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th April 2012
    Location
    Could be Sirius
    Posts
    1,357
    Thanks
    4,245
    Thanked 7,361 times in 1,235 posts

    Default Re: Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint!

    Quote Posted by A Voice from the Mountains (here)
    There is a lot of information here. I had completely forgotten about Agenda 21 in the storm of all the other policy changes that are occurring.

    Thanks for posting this we-R-one and it's good to talk to you again!
    Hey welcome back! Hope you're enjoying the 'dismantling' as much as we are? Once I started digging into the Executive Orders, it became quite clear what Trump was doing. With so much going on, I almost missed it. I look forward to reading your posts!
    "We never left you..."-ELizabeth Marie from the E.T. race The ELohim 5/19/2017

    ........where being the BLACK SHEEP, isn't the exception, it's the rule!

  4. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to we-R-one For This Post:

    A Voice from the Mountains (11th April 2018), BMJ (11th April 2018), edina (11th April 2018), Foxie Loxie (11th April 2018), genevieve (11th April 2018), KiwiElf (11th April 2018), Michelle Marie (13th April 2018), turiya (11th April 2018)

  5. Link to Post #63
    United States Avalon Member A Voice from the Mountains's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th September 2014
    Location
    Appalachia
    Posts
    1,542
    Thanks
    5,157
    Thanked 7,348 times in 1,426 posts

    Default Re: Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint!

    Yes, I'm enjoying it greatly. It's long overdue. I want to see entire agencies shut down and responsibilities returned to state/local governments everywhere possible.

  6. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to A Voice from the Mountains For This Post:

    BMJ (11th April 2018), Foxie Loxie (11th April 2018), genevieve (11th April 2018), KiwiElf (11th April 2018), Michelle Marie (13th April 2018), turiya (11th April 2018), we-R-one (11th April 2018)

  7. Link to Post #64
    United States Avalon Member we-R-one's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th April 2012
    Location
    Could be Sirius
    Posts
    1,357
    Thanks
    4,245
    Thanked 7,361 times in 1,235 posts

    Default Re: Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint!

    ya, that's where I'm a bit worried as I'm not convinced the states, especially on a local level, are aware how they're still trying to implement known AGENDA 21 policies...
    "We never left you..."-ELizabeth Marie from the E.T. race The ELohim 5/19/2017

    ........where being the BLACK SHEEP, isn't the exception, it's the rule!

  8. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to we-R-one For This Post:

    A Voice from the Mountains (11th April 2018), BMJ (11th April 2018), edina (11th April 2018), Foxie Loxie (11th April 2018), justntime2learn (12th April 2018), KiwiElf (13th April 2018), Michelle Marie (13th April 2018), turiya (11th April 2018)

  9. Link to Post #65
    United States Avalon Member A Voice from the Mountains's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th September 2014
    Location
    Appalachia
    Posts
    1,542
    Thanks
    5,157
    Thanked 7,348 times in 1,426 posts

    Default Re: Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint!

    Well the local politicians near where I live in Virginia were raising hell about it back in 2010 and 2012. The problem is that this state is dominated by the Washington DC suburbs. If it weren't for Washington DC, Virginia would still be a reliably red state. Alexandria is a cancer upon us.

  10. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to A Voice from the Mountains For This Post:

    BMJ (11th April 2018), Foxie Loxie (11th April 2018), genevieve (11th April 2018), KiwiElf (13th April 2018), Michelle Marie (13th April 2018), we-R-one (11th April 2018)

  11. Link to Post #66
    Canada Avalon Member Fellow Aspirant's Avatar
    Join Date
    6th July 2011
    Location
    Kingston, Ontario
    Age
    67
    Posts
    914
    Thanks
    5,441
    Thanked 4,765 times in 835 posts

    Default Re: Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint!

    Quote Posted by A Voice from the Mountains (here)
    Quote Posted by Fellow Aspirant (here)
    Hi Voice

    I wonder if you could help me understand what you are driving at by explaining what you mean by "professional".

    B.
    It's just a concept to help distinguish from opinions that may be, for example, more fuzzy, vague, very loosely formulated, etc. I don't mean that you actually have to be a medical professional of course, and honestly I tend not to trust the medical profession anyway since it was taken over by the Rockefellers by the 1950's. I must not be alone in that either since "alternative medicine" has exploded as much as it has in recent years, along with the organic food market, and a general backlash against companies like McDonalds and Monsanto.

    I could go on and on about all the reasons why I have learned to distrust the medical industry in the US but I figure that you have probably already made up your own mind about it one way or the other, and there's not much that trading academic papers will change when there are so many of them that reach so many contradictory conclusions on so many different subjects, and which represent so many different interests.

    But back to your question, when you use words like "repugnant" to describe people you disagree with, there is obviously quite a bit of negative emotional charge there. As all over the place as medical papers are, even they try to avoid that kind of language in order to maintain their credibility. Maybe your problem with Mike is more political than it has anything to do with health stuff but I actually take him seriously, and also Dr. Mercola, Dr. Group, and several others who are into things like maintaining health through whole foods, regular detoxing of the kidneys and liver, and all that kind of stuff that conventional doctors don't seem to be too interested in until you're already dying.
    Voice

    Thanks for your thoughtful response. I'll try to keep my contribution as succinct and sincere as I can.

    First, regarding diction: I always endeavour to use the most apt words that are at my disposal when explaining my emotions and or thoughts. I am well aware of the connotations of "repugnant" as an adjective, and insist that it is the most appropriate English word that I can conjure. Yes, it is most certainly negative. And what is wrong with using it, if I intend to convey a negative impression? Please don't think that you are leveling any kind of legitimate personal attack on my thinking. If so, it is very misguided, for despite your obvious sensitivity to it, in my opinion this "kind of language" is quite diplomatic and measured. It is used everyday, around the world, at the highest levels of communication.

    Mike Adams is repugnant.

    I have several reasons for holding this opinion, most of which will carry no weight with supporters of Donald Trump. Firstly, I object to his demonization of all standard health and medical care in the world. His blanket condemnation of the current medical system has already convinced many to stop or avoid treatments for life-threatening illnesses, maladies for which there are cures offered by modern medicine. In place of verified, proven treatments, he sells his own quack remedies. To make money on others' desperation is repugnant.

    In particular, I vehemently disagree with his lies regarding vaccines, and they are many and varied.

    It's easy to find those in the science based community who will delineate Adams' faults: (please be advised that in the following bit there are many "trigger" words for the criticism averse)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_News

    "Writing in the journal Vaccine, Anna Kata identified Natural News as one of multiple websites spreading "irresponsible health information".[22]

    According to John Banks, Adams uses "pseudoscience to sell his lies" and is "seen as generally a quack and a shill by science bloggers."[10]

    One such blogger, David Gorski of ScienceBlogs, called Natural News "one of the most wretched hives of scum and quackery on the Internet," and the most "blatant purveyor of the worst kind of quackery and paranoid anti-physician and anti-medicine conspiracy theories anywhere on the Internet",[23] and a one-stop-shop for "virtually every quackery known to humankind, all slathered with a heaping, helping of unrelenting hostility to science-based medicine and science in general."[12]

    Peter Bowditch of the website Ratbags commented about the site.[24]

    Steven Novella of NeuroLogica Blog called NaturalNews "a crank alt med site that promotes every sort of medical nonsense imaginable." Novella continued: "If it is unscientific, antiscientific, conspiracy-mongering, or downright silly, Mike Adams appears to be all for it – whatever sells the "natural" products he hawks on his site."[2]

    Individuals who commented about Adams' website include astronomer and blogger Phil Plait,[25] PZ Myers,[26] and Mark Hoofnagle.[27]

    Brian Dunning listed it as #1 on his "Top 10 Worst Anti-Science Websites" list.[28]

    Adams is listed as a "promoter of questionable methods" by Quackwatch.[29]

    Robert T. Carroll at The Skeptic's Dictionary said, "Natural News is not a very good source for information. If you don't trust me on this, go to Respectful Insolence or any of the other bloggers on ScienceBlogs and do a search for "Natural News" or "Mike Adams" (who is Natural News). Hundreds of entries will be found and not one of them will have a good word to say about Mike Adams as a source."[30]

    An article in the journal, Vaccine said the site "tend(s) to not only spread irresponsible health information in general (e.g. discouraging chemotherapy or radiation for cancer treatment, antiretrovirals for HIV, and insulin for diabetes), but also have large sections with dubious information on vaccines."[22]

    After Patrick Swayze's death in 2009, Adams posted an article in which he remarked that Swayze, in dying, "joins many other celebrities who have been recently killed by pharmaceuticals or chemotherapy." Commentators of Adams' article on Patrick Swayze included bloggers such as David Gorski[31] and Phil Plait, the latter of whom called Adams' commentary "obnoxious and loathsome."[32]

    When Angelina Jolie underwent a double mastectomy in May 2013 because she had a mutation in the BRCA1 gene, Adams stated that "Countless millions of women carry the BRCA1 gene and never express breast cancer because they lead healthy, anti-cancer lifestyles based on smart nutrition, exercise, sensible sunlight exposure and avoidance of cancer-causing chemicals." Gorski called the article "vile" and noted that Adams had written similarly themed articles about the death of Michael Jackson, Tony Snow, and Tim Russert.[33]

    Pushing further into the dark, Adams famously called for the murder of Monsanto execs:

    "Adams has gone so far as to ask anti-GMO activists to kill scientists and science journalists, writing: "it is the moral right — and even the obligation — of human beings everywhere to actively plan and carry out the killing of those engaged in heinous crimes against humanity."

    And then there's the situation faced by Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz, a man with an alternative take on biology, and who expected Adams to represent his views faithfully, but was shocked to find that Adams had pirated the knowledge and sold it as his own, calling it "Elemonics". The worst aspect of this theft, in Horowitz' mind, is that Adams screwed it up. This, he concludes, was intentional (see Conclusion)

    As posted at this site: http://www.waronwethepeople.com/elemonics-scam/

    Some excerpts from Horowitz:

    "The title of my presentation was “Restoring the World’s Natural Healing Paradigm – 5 Steps to Health, Happiness & Sustainability.” My speech featured the aforementioned intelligence on the power of the sacred frequencies and musical mathematics capable of producing miraculous transformations in body chemistry. I included a simple understanding of water, pH, alkalinity and the electro-conductivity of hydrogen and oxygen in water resonating at the prescribed frequency of 528Hz. That frequency, I concluded by 2006, resonated at the heart of “the real da Vinci code” and was the equivalent to “pure tone LOVE.”

    Mike Adams appeared to be captivated throughout my presentation that he recorded on video. And when I finished speaking we both fielded questions from the audience. That event, including the scheduled Q&A session with “Dr. Horowitz and the Health Ranger,” is still archived online HERE.

    So I now speak with personal knowledge and some authority when I say that Mike Adams took six years to get a sudden epiphany during a “walk in nature” to “intuit” and twist my theory he listened to me detail in 2010.

    And not only does Mike Adams take and twist my and my colleagues research, without giving credit where credit is due (i.e., professional attributions reflecting civility and professionalism), but he convolutes this wonderful knowledge and abuses it to defraud consumers.

    And he has likewise pilfered the information he found on Amazon.com and in this linked article about Asegun Henry that came out in February of this year. Quoting therefrom:
    “Mechanical engineer Asegun Henry is figuring out the unique ‘musical’ signatures of every element on the period table to give scientists a new way of analysing their constantly shifting molecular structure – as well as science nerds like us the chance to actually hear how different arrangements of molecules and chemical bonds can behave.”

    Ironically, perhaps, Horowitz concludes his paper with the claim that Adams is misrepresenting his (Horowitz') work in order to discredit it at the behest of what can best be described for our purposes as the Deep State:

    "Conclusion

    A wolf in sheep’s clothing best explains what you have just read–easily discredited garbage by someone who knows better than to discredit themselves by publishing gobbley goop.

    The only reasonable explanation for Adams to have made such a fool of himself in my eyes, is COINTELPRO–the “Counter-intelligence Program,” because Adams is not stupid. He is clever and cunning for a “Health Ranger” who went far out of his way, and beyond his field of expertise, to discredit legitimate research and developments in this field of medicinal music.

    COINTELPRO is the social-engineering, natural medicine disparaging, agency of Big Pharma. How Adams “discovered” Elemonics compounds years of COINTELPRO propaganda used to damage natural medicine, divert from 528 science, and undermine energy medicine authorities, including my celebrity and 528 reputability just like the oligarchy did to Keely and Tesla. This affront against common sense and acoustic science misrepresents professionalism advancing in this field at this time. It dishonors all alternative health care providers, natural healers, and music therapists."



    And yes, of course I am aware enough to know that there are many huge problems with our western system of medicine, but I am not foolish enough to throw the baby out with the bath water. The current level of care received by me and my family has been life saving. I, for example, am still alive and kicking 11 years after having had my prostate removed (very aggressive stage 4 cancer) and my oldest child is now a thriving thirty year old, having received a double lung transplant over ten years ago. All of the expenses, incurred at the time and those ongoing for the drugs and follow-up appointments were paid for out of my province's tax monies. For such sharing of costs, I am exceptionally grateful. For my family to have been burdened with them would have been financially ruinous.

    Adams has a lot to answer for, much of it repugnant behaviour. I doubt, though, that he expected to be accused of working for the Rothschilds or Rockefellers. It's a complex world indeed.

    Namaste,

    Brian
    Last edited by Fellow Aspirant; 13th April 2018 at 02:53.
    A human being is a part of the whole, called by us "Universe," a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest—a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness.

    Albert E.

  12. Link to Post #67
    United States Avalon Member A Voice from the Mountains's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th September 2014
    Location
    Appalachia
    Posts
    1,542
    Thanks
    5,157
    Thanked 7,348 times in 1,426 posts

    Default Re: Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint!

    Quote Posted by Fellow Aspirant (here)
    First, regarding diction: I always endeavour to use the most apt words that are at my disposal when explaining my emotions and or thoughts. I am well aware of the connotations of "repugnant" as an adjective, and insist that it is the most appropriate English word that I can conjure. Yes, it is most certainly negative. And what is wrong with using it, if I intend to convey a negative impression?
    The only thing that is "wrong" with it, is that it's just very emotionally charged. But that doesn't particularly bother me, in fact I don't really care. But you do acknowledge that emotions and logic are often at odds with each other, right? That's why fear is such a great political cudgel for getting people to agree to irrational things, because when we get scared or angry, certain parts of our brain associated with reasoning shut down. The same thing happens in the presence of a perceived authority: we defer judgment to the professional/expert/etc. and critical thinking parts of our brain shut down.

    Check this out:

    Quote Expert Advice Shuts Your Brain Down

    A brain-scanning study of people making financial choices suggests that when given expert advice, the decision-making parts of our brains often shut down.

    The problem with this, of course, is that the advice may not be good.

    "When the expert's advice made the least sense, that's where we could see the behavioral effect," said study co-author Greg Berns, an Emory University neuroscientist. "It's as if people weren't using their own internal value mechanisms."
    https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Sc...7192000&page=1

    I've also seen other studies on this and it's not confined to financial advice. Doctors often give terrible advice as well, and medical malpractice kills over 100,000 people every year in the US alone.

    You are more likely to be killed by a doctor making the wrong diagnosis, giving the wrong prescription, or making some other error, than you likely to die in a terrorist attack or mass shooting. And when the doctors give this terrible advice of course people follow their directions unquestioningly.

    I had a family member go to the doctor not long ago for swelling feet. When I talked to her, I asked her what they said was causing it. Well, they didn't know. But they gave her pills to make her pee more often hoping that that would solve the problem. Without even knowing what the problem was. Also they only saw her for about five minutes before giving the prescription and kicking her out. Great treatment right?

    In Brazil (and many other countries) the government and insurance companies are more accomodating to alternative treatments that actually ask what you have been eating, about your daily routine, any stresses or other problems, etc. etc. Western countries are actually very backward compared to many other countries in this regard. Doctors in other countries often take more time to get to know you and may prescribe a dietary change or exercise or something that simple. In the US, it's often either pills or surgery, because that's what doctors focus on in med school. They just hand out pills like candy because of the influence of the big pharmaceutical companies. This is just as true for Obamacare too btw. If people had more private options for getting checked out by doctors this situation might not be so ridiculous.


    Quote Please don't think that you are leveling any kind of legitimate personal attack on my thinking. If so, it is very misguided, for despite your obvious sensitivity to it, in my opinion this "kind of language" is quite diplomatic and measured. It is used everyday, around the world, at the highest levels of communication.

    Mike Adams is repugnant.
    Of course people talk like that every day. But if someone has a criticism of Mike Adams, and I'm curious to about it, and the first thing I see is a bunch of emotionally charged ad homs, my first thought is, woah. This guy is upset. And then I think of what I said above about emotions shutting the brain down. I happen to loathe plenty of people, but when I criticize them I don't feel any particular desire to make it emotional. I think it's usually more effective just to stick with facts.


    Quote I have several reasons for holding this opinion, most of which will carry no weight with supporters of Donald Trump. Firstly, I object to his demonization of all standard health and medical care in the world.
    You might want to actually study how "all" healthcare is delivered "in the world," because like I mentioned above, not all countries follow the Western model of medicine. The Chinese focus on prevention through dietary changes, traditional herbs, and things like that. So do many other countries. They aren't anxious to switch to our way of doing things either.

    But in the US, and probably also in Canada, prescribing herbs doesn't make money for big pharma so even getting government-approved testing is basically out of the question. It costs something like one million dollars to go through all the steps to get FDA-approved testing. Only patented pills (often synthetic versions of natural chemicals in herbs) make such testing profitable in the end.


    Quote His blanket condemnation of the current medical system has already convinced many to stop or avoid treatments for life threatening illnesses, maladies for which there are cures offered by modern medicine.
    Just out of curiosity, do you really believe that radiation and chemotherapy are really the best available treatments for cancer? Maybe you do believe that and that's fine. It would help to explain your views.


    Quote In particular, I vehemently disagree with his lies regarding vaccines, and they are many and varied.
    It's easy to find those in the science based community who will delineate Adams' faults: (please be advised that in the following bit there are many "trigger" words for the criticism averse)

    Writing in the journal Vaccine, Anna Kata identified Natural News as one of multiple websites spreading "irresponsible health information".[22] According to John Banks, Adams uses "pseudoscience to sell his lies" and is "seen as generally a quack and a shill by science bloggers."[10] One such blogger, David Gorski of ScienceBlogs, called Natural News "one of the most wretched hives of scum and quackery on the Internet," and the most "blatant purveyor of the worst kind of quackery and paranoid anti-physician and anti-medicine conspiracy theories anywhere on the Internet",[23] and a one-stop-shop for "virtually every quackery known to humankind, all slathered with a heaping, helping of unrelenting hostility to science-based medicine and science in general."[12] Peter Bowditch of the website Ratbags commented about the site.[24] Steven Novella of NeuroLogica Blog called NaturalNews "a crank alt med site that promotes every sort of medical nonsense imaginable." Novella continued: "If it is unscientific, antiscientific, conspiracy-mongering, or downright silly, Mike Adams appears to be all for it – whatever sells the "natural" products he hawks on his site."[2]

    Individuals who commented about Adams' website include astronomer and blogger Phil Plait,[25] PZ Myers,[26] and Mark Hoofnagle.[27] Brian Dunning listed it as #1 on his "Top 10 Worst Anti-Science Websites" list.[28] Adams is listed as a "promoter of questionable methods" by Quackwatch.[29] Robert T. Carroll at The Skeptic's Dictionary said, "Natural News is not a very good source for information. If you don't trust me on this, go to Respectful Insolence or any of the other bloggers on ScienceBlogs and do a search for "Natural News" or "Mike Adams" (who is Natural News). Hundreds of entries will be found and not one of them will have a good word to say about Mike Adams as a source."[30]

    An article in the journal, Vaccine said the site "tend(s) to not only spread irresponsible health information in general (e.g. discouraging chemotherapy or radiation for cancer treatment, antiretrovirals for HIV, and insulin for diabetes), but also have large sections with dubious information on vaccines."[22]


    After Patrick Swayze's death in 2009, Adams posted an article in which he remarked that Swayze, in dying, "joins many other celebrities who have been recently killed by pharmaceuticals or chemotherapy." Commentators of Adams' article on Patrick Swayze included bloggers such as David Gorski[31] and Phil Plait, the latter of whom called Adams' commentary "obnoxious and loathsome."[32] When Angelina Jolie underwent a double mastectomy in May 2013 because she had a mutation in the BRCA1 gene, Adams stated that "Countless millions of women carry the BRCA1 gene and never express breast cancer because they lead healthy, anti-cancer lifestyles based on smart nutrition, exercise, sensible sunlight exposure and avoidance of cancer-causing chemicals." Gorski called the article "vile" and noted that Adams had written similarly themed articles about the death of Michael Jackson, Tony Snow, and Tim Russert.[33]
    I see a lot of emotion in this excerpt too. It's interesting that you imply that I would be "triggered" by reading this stuff, because the phenomenon of being emotionally triggered is exactly what I am pointing out as irrational and debilitating.

    So here are a summary of the "arguments" in the excerpt above:

    - He's "irresponsible" (ad hom)
    - He uses "pseudoscience to sell his lies" (ad hom, no corroboration)
    - His site is "one of the most wretched hives of scum and quackery" (ad hom)
    - He is a "blatant purveyor of the worst kind of quackery," etc. (ad hom)
    - He promotes "every sort of medical nonsense imaginable" (ad hom, no examples)
    - An astronomer has a bad opinion of him
    - Some other people who run "skeptic" websites have a bad opinion of him
    - Someone writing for a medical journal has hurt feelings over his opinion of vaccines
    - He noted that Angelina Jolie got a double masectory because of a gene that doesn't always cause cancer


    That study I refered at the beginning of this reply is why I like to ask for more than just opinions and feelings before I come to some conclusion about something, because peoples' brains shut down in the presence of authority and that's not always a good thing. "So-and-so said so and he has degrees and writes for journals" isn't actually a fool-proof argument.


    A second study for you to consider:

    Quote Why Most Published Research Findings Are False

    Abstract
    Summary

    There is increasing concern that most current published research findings are false. The probability that a research claim is true may depend on study power and bias, the number of other studies on the same question, and, importantly, the ratio of true to no relationships among the relationships probed in each scientific field. In this framework, a research finding is less likely to be true when the studies conducted in a field are smaller; when effect sizes are smaller; when there is a greater number and lesser preselection of tested relationships; where there is greater flexibility in designs, definitions, outcomes, and analytical modes; when there is greater financial and other interest and prejudice; and when more teams are involved in a scientific field in chase of statistical significance. Simulations show that for most study designs and settings, it is more likely for a research claim to be false than true. Moreover, for many current scientific fields, claimed research findings may often be simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias. In this essay, I discuss the implications of these problems for the conduct and interpretation of research.
    http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicin...l.pmed.0020124

    Note that this is from a weekly peer-reviewed journal, the Public Library of Science Medicine, with an editorial board consisting of professional doctors and scientists.

    The same study is hosted by the US National Institute of Health website here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182327/


    Here is a non-academic article summarizing his findings:

    Quote Most medical studies are wrong

    “Science is a noble endeavor, but it’s also a low-yield endeavor," Dr. John Ioannidis told The Atlantic recently.

    It may be the truest statement yet made on medical research.

    It's a story flying around the medical community today, although it's based on a single five-year old study, from a team of Greek researchers headed by Ioannidis, titled simply Why Most Published Research Findings are False.

    So why is it news now? Possibly because Ioannidis became division chief of the Stanford Prevention Research Center in September. The picture is from the press release.

    What Ioannnidis and his Greek team did was a statistical analysis of major medical research papers, finding out that many of the most popular had results that were later reversed after further study.

    This goes beyond the placebo effect we talked about last November. It turns out that critics of medical research are right:

    The smaller the study the more likely it's wrong.
    The smaller the effect seen in a study, the more likely it's wrong.
    The more variables tested in a study the more likely it's wrong.
    The more flexible designs, definitions, and outcomes are, the more likely it's wrong.
    The greater the financial interest in being right the more likely it's wrong.
    The hotter the field of research, the more likely it's wrong.

    Much of this is stuff your earth science teacher should have told you in junior high school. Narrow the variables. Narrow the scope. Tighten the design so only what you're testing varies. Take your biases out of the equation.

    Improving the scientific method won't be easy. Biases like money, fame, and power are enormous. Ioannidis' prescription is to not fall for any single study, to accept that being wrong is not a bad thing, and to have many people re-test any conclusion before acting on it.

    This won't result in perfection. Many, many studies were done on antidepressants like Zoloft, and millions of prescriptions were written, before it was found that in most cases it was no better than a placebo. The same is true with advice on mammograms and PSA tests for cancer. Or ideas like doing puzzles to fend off Alzheimer's.

    What feels right, what's backed by big money or major institutions, is often wrong. Test it again, and again. Don't jump to conclusions.

    Pretty comforting, actually.

    What I find most comforting here is that the bleeding edge health care practiced in America may be wasting money to no good effect. Progress in clinical practice may slow as a result, but more people will be helped for less money.
    https://www.zdnet.com/article/most-m...ies-are-wrong/


    Emphasis is mine. "What feels right...is often wrong."

    Critical thinking shuts down in the presence of experts.

    "What feels right..."

    Remember, this is a professional working for Stanford University and even he is telling you that most medical papers are bogus.

    How do you justify your faith in the "experts" in the face of information like this? How are you, a non-professional, able to decide which professionals to believe and which not to believe? Is it based on feelings, or facts? Were you even aware of the study above previously? I'm sure you are also familiar with the concept of confirmation bias. Maybe this study never even came across your radar because it doesn't conform to what you already believe, and you had no reason to look for it. You clearly trust the experts.


    Quote Pushing further into the dark, Adams famously called for the murder of Monsanto execs:
    A bit extreme, but I'm not a fan of Monsanto either and Monsanto's actions have resulted in the starvation of many people in India alone. They once sold a bunch of Indian farmers seeds with terminator genes and neglected to tell the Indians. When the next crop failed to germinate, many people starved. That's on Monsanto's hands. Mike Adams may have went too far in calling for the deaths of their executives, but remember that those same executives ACTUALLY DID kill people. And that's just ONE of the things Monsanto is responsible for. I have to actively avoid GMO ingredients because of them. So trying to make me feel sympathy for Monsanto execs just isn't happening.


    Quote Even Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz, a man with an alternative take on biology, and who expected him to represent his views faithfully, was shocked to find that Adams had pirated the knowledge and sold it as his own, calling it "Elemonics". The worst aspect of this theft, in Horowitz' mind, is that Adams screwed it up. This, he concludes, was intentional (see Conclusion)

    As posted at this site: http://www.waronwethepeople.com/elemonics-scam/

    Some excerpts from Horowitz:

    "The title of my presentation was “Restoring the World’s Natural Healing Paradigm – 5 Steps to Health, Happiness & Sustainability.” My speech featured the aforementioned intelligence on the power of the sacred frequencies and musical mathematics capable of producing miraculous transformations in body chemistry. I included a simple understanding of water, pH, alkalinity and the electro-conductivity of hydrogen and oxygen in water resonating at the prescribed frequency of 528Hz. That frequency, I concluded by 2006, resonated at the heart of “the real da Vinci code” and was the equivalent to “pure tone LOVE.”

    Mike Adams appeared to be captivated throughout my presentation that he recorded on video. And when I finished speaking we both fielded questions from the audience. That event, including the scheduled Q&A session with “Dr. Horowitz and the Health Ranger,” is still archived online HERE.

    So I now speak with personal knowledge and some authority when I say that Mike Adams took six years to get a sudden epiphany during a “walk in nature” to “intuit” and twist my theory he listened to me detail in 2010.

    And not only does Mike Adams take and twist my and my colleagues research, without giving credit where credit is due (i.e., professional attributions reflecting civility and professionalism), but he convolutes this wonderful knowledge and abuses it to defraud consumers.
    "Twisting" the research of others and presenting it as new information is actually the general idea of what is supposed to happen in academic circles. There is very little new data presented in most papers, but just different interpretations or takes on old data. To use the word "twisting" to describe this process is just being disingenous and trying to sensationalize the normal process of building upon others' work.

    If Mike Adams did build upon this guy's work, then he SHOULD have credited him for it, or at least referenced it in some way as a starting point for his own take on it, but your own quote even goes on to say that Mike Adams cited another researcher, Asegun Henry, who was doing similar work. So Mike Adams did in fact reference another man's research that he was building upon. It just wasn't Horowitz's, and the guy is obviously butthurt about it.

    Aside from trying to make normal academic practices sound criminal and neglecting the fact that Adams did cite others' work, Horowitz further destroys his credibility if he is attributing hidden motivations to Adams as if he can read the guy's mind. What do you think about the "Deep State"?


    Quote "Conclusion

    A wolf in sheep’s clothing best explains what you have just read–easily discredited garbage by someone who knows better than to discredit themselves by publishing gobbley goop.

    The only reasonable explanation for Adams to have made such a fool of himself in my eyes, is COINTELPRO–the “Counter-intelligence Program,” because Adams is not stupid. He is clever and cunning for a “Health Ranger” who went far out of his way, and beyond his field of expertise, to discredit legitimate research and developments in this field of medicinal music.

    COINTELPRO is the social-engineering, natural medicine disparaging, agency of Big Pharma. How Adams “discovered” Elemonics compounds years of COINTELPRO propaganda used to damage natural medicine, divert from 528 science, and undermine energy medicine authorities, including my celebrity and 528 reputability just like the oligarchy did to Keely and Tesla. This affront against common sense and acoustic science misrepresents professionalism advancing in this field at this time. It dishonors all alternative health care providers, natural healers, and music therapists."


    And yes, of course I am aware enough to know that there are many huge problems with our western system of medicine, but I am not foolish enough to throw the baby out with the bath water. The current level of care received by me and my family has been life saving. I, for example, am still alive and kicking 11 years after having had my prostate removed (very aggressive stage 4 version of cancer) and my oldest child is now a thriving thirty year old, having received a double lung transplant over ten years ago. All of the expenses, incurred at the time and those ongoing for the drugs and follow-up appointments were paid for out of my province's tax monies. For such sharing of costs, I am exceptionally grateful. For my family to have been burdened with them would have been financially ruinous.

    Adams has a lot to answer for, much of it repugnant behaviour. I doubt, though, that he expected to be accused of working for the Rothschilds or Rockefellers. It's a complex world indeed.

    Namaste,

    Brian
    So here's my own conclusion:

    - Mistakes by medical professionals are now the 3rd leading cause of death in the United States
    - Most medical research papers are wrong
    - Critical thinking shuts down in the face of "expert advice," even if it's crazy

    Nearly all of the arguments you make against Adams are ad hominem and fueled by very strong emotions. And I know what COINTELPRO is. I suppose you believe this program was carried out during the years Adam has been active, from 2003 under Bush, through all the Obama years, until today.

    Also, Canada's healthcare system is unsustainable, collapsing, and will not be available for your children:

    Canadian Health Care in Crisis

    Quote A letter from the Moncton Hospital to a New Brunswick heart patient in need of an electrocardiogram said the appointment would be in three months. It added: "If the person named on this computer-generated letter is deceased, please accept our sincere apologies."

    The patient wasn't dead, according to the doctor who showed the letter to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity. But there are many Canadians who claim the long wait for the test and the frigid formality of the letter are indicative of a health system badly in need of emergency care.

    Americans who flock to Canada for cheap flu shots often come away impressed at the free and first-class medical care available to Canadians, rich or poor. But tell that to hospital administrators constantly having to cut staff for lack of funds, or to the mother whose teenager was advised she would have to wait up to three years for surgery to repair a torn knee ligament.

    "It's like somebody's telling you that you can buy this car, and you've paid for the car, but you can't have it right now," said Jane Pelton. Rather than leave daughter Emily in pain and a knee brace, the Ottawa family opted to pay $3,300 for arthroscopic surgery at a private clinic in Vancouver, with no help from the government.

    "Every day we're paying for health care, yet when we go to access it, it's just not there," said Pelton.

    The average Canadian family pays about 48 percent of its income in taxes each year, partly to fund the health care system. Rates vary from province to province, but Ontario, the most populous, spends roughly 40 percent of every tax dollar on health care, according to the Canadian Taxpayers Federation.

    The system is going broke, says the federation, which campaigns for tax reform and private enterprise in health care.
    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/canadia...are-in-crisis/


    This is a typical problem for socialized medical programs. Their costs balloon for a combination of reasons, while funds cannot meet them. This is an economics issue that obviously most people who vote for this kind of thing aren't aware of. Economics are another subject!

  13. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to A Voice from the Mountains For This Post:

    BMJ (13th April 2018), Cardillac (13th April 2018), genevieve (13th April 2018), Jayke (13th April 2018), KiwiElf (13th April 2018), we-R-one (14th April 2018)

  14. Link to Post #68
    United States Moderator Michelle Marie's Avatar
    Join Date
    5th June 2011
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,897
    Thanks
    20,018
    Thanked 11,220 times in 1,848 posts

    Default Re: Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint!

    Quote Posted by we-R-one (here)
    ya, that's where I'm a bit worried as I'm not convinced the states, especially on a local level, are aware how they're still trying to implement known AGENDA 21 policies...
    Here is what is happening in Oregon:
    Oregon Dept. of Energy: Addressing Climate Change
    http://www.oregon.gov/energy/energy-...te-Change.aspx
    “We know that climate change is influenced by human activities. “

    Oregon: Senate Bill 1070
    https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/201...ocument/SB1070

    Oregon Global Warming Commission Report 2017
    https://www.keeporegoncool.org/reports/

    Climate Change in Oregon
    https://www.keeporegoncool.org/clima...nge-in-oregon/
    *********************
    Jackson County, Oregon
    Climate and Health Action Plan
    http://www.oregon.gov/oha/ph/Healthy...et-jackson.pdf

    On this 2 page document, it says to call Health and Human Services for a full report, but when I called, they were clueless as to what report it referred to. They skirted many questions and basically were stonewalling further research.
    ***********************************
    Climate and Health
    http://www.oregonlive.com/health/ind...ty_focuse.html

    “The authority released its Oregon Climate and Health Resilience Plan on Thursday, outlining its strategy to help educate and collaborate with other agencies and local officials.”

    Here we go with the word: “Resilience”

    This usually means tied to Rockefeller grants and schemes.
    ………………………………….OH, here we go!..........................
    “Last September, the state was among 16 nationwide that received a grant from the federal Centers for Disease Prevention and Control to protect the public from the health effects of climate change.”

    These are reported to carry stipulations related to “disaster capital" which is Agenda 21 fallout (land grabbing & corporate profits) after they manipulate the weather or cause "wildfires".

    Here’s what they say they did with the money…no reference to grant stipulations.
    (The stipulation information was outlined by Deborah Tavares. Both states have to watch for “wildfires”.)

    The state has divided Oregon's pot -- $171,000 - into six grants of $28,500, giving one to the health authority, another to the North Central Health District in Wasco, Sherman and Gilliam counties, and the rest to Jackson, Benton, Crook and Multnomah counties.
    • The state has used the money to help fund a study with the Oregon Department of Transportation on the effects of the storms in December, 2015. It has also created a training module for the Oregon Nurses Association, with another module planned.
    • The health district will use its money to offer private well-water testing to landowners in areas that might be the most susceptible to climate change.
    • Jackson County officials plan to create a public alert system warning about health effects from poor air quality.
    York said the state's plan spans five years and that it hopes to develop other strategies to protect Oregonians from public health risks caused by climate change.

    Oregon Lawmakers Look to 2019 to Cap Greenhouse Gases
    https://www.opb.org/news/article/ore...e-change-2019/

    *******************
    Now they’re trying to call it a “grassroots” volunteer movement and SOCAN is the non-profit organization that is driving the agenda.

    SOCAN is a “grassroots, volunteer, non-profit organization of area residents who care about climate change and have joined forces to take bold action against it. Through volunteer projects, we focus on reducing the impacts of Global Warming across Southern Oregon.”
    http://socan.eco/

    Here is their calendar for reaching the public:
    http://socan.eco/events/

    I see their recruitment posters everywhere!

    MM
    Last edited by Michelle Marie; 13th April 2018 at 08:22.
    ~*~ "The best way to predict the future is to create it." - Peter Drucker ~*~ “To laugh often and much; to win the respect of intelligent people and the affection of children...to leave the world a better place...to know even one life has breathed easier because you have lived. This is to have succeeded.” -Ralph Waldo Emerson ~*~ "Creative minds always have been known to survive any kind of bad training." - Anna Freud ~*~

  15. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Michelle Marie For This Post:

    A Voice from the Mountains (13th April 2018), BMJ (13th April 2018), Foxie Loxie (13th April 2018), genevieve (13th April 2018), we-R-one (14th April 2018)

  16. Link to Post #69
    Canada Avalon Member Fellow Aspirant's Avatar
    Join Date
    6th July 2011
    Location
    Kingston, Ontario
    Age
    67
    Posts
    914
    Thanks
    5,441
    Thanked 4,765 times in 835 posts

    Default Re: Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint!

    Hi Voice

    Boy, it's a good thing that neither of us is an expert!

    You spend a lot of time and make considerable effort explaining what a terrible mess western health care is. I agree. MY point is that for all its faults, it sometimes offers the best way to treat certain illnesses. If I break my leg, I'm not going to eschew taking an ambulance to the hospital in favour of going home to drink some herbal tea. Staying as healthy as possible, as far I am concerned, means using discernment regarding the options offered. And yes, by now I know a little about the human foibles associated with our system, from incompetence to outright evil (as in the case of a "nurse" who was recently convicted of murdering patients in the retirement home where she worked). I've seen stupidity on a massive scale, with foolish government interference that would make your head spin. And I know that, in one massive study done about five years ago, fully 85% of initial diagnoses are flat out wrong. That said, I am still of the opinion that, if carefully approached and researched, one can find practitioners and practices that will not only make one's life more pleasureable, but save it from a premature and grisly end. What would you say, for example to my daughter, who after 19 years of suffering from the debilitating effects of cystic fibrosis, and whose lungs could only manage to supply 20% of the oxygen required for life? Perhaps, "I'm sorry, I hope you do better in the next life" (?) Or would you be thankful for the risky chance of getting a pair of donor lungs? Blanket condemnations of such a vast and varied system of care are very short sighted. And in the case of Mr. Adams, to attempt to persuade someone of the efficacy of an "alternative" treatment, when he is without any medical knowledge, and ply the reader with his own "medicines", is repugnant. Or even , to sweeten the dictionary plot, scurrilous.

    And your parsing of the critics' opinions into a pile of invalid attacks via their "ad hominem" nature (I assume you are referring to this fallacy, from your use of the strangely abbreviated term 'ad homs'). You are clearly more than a little confused about what an 'ad hominem' attack actually is. It is NOT criticism leveled at someone's position or claim. It is an attack on the person him or herself. Like if someone thought it legitimate to try to obviate Mr. Trump's thinking on the basis of his hair style.

    While I admit that the words used by the scientists to describe Adams' behaviour are in some cases 'over the top', and descend to the gutter of name calling (which would be an ad hominem attack) I need to direct your attention to the reasons why the scientific community is displeased with his claims. That is, they object to his use of unscientific claims for what they consider to be the truth. As such, the negativity regarding someone who is trying to be one of them has struck a few nerves. The anger is further exacerbated by Adams' apparent ability to convince others to seek out his treatments instead of those that are part of the scientific pantheon. So, what I have offered as examples of scientists who disparage Adams are examples of people who disparage his claims, not his hair style. Adams' claims of scientific veracity are simply wrong, and this is what the scientific community has a problem with. There are no ad hominem attacks here.

    And here's where things get really messed up, yes? There is no doubt that western medical science does not have all the right answers. Hell, every discipline of western science can be faulted for rushing down false tunnels of "knowledge" (But that's a whole other thread - or a million). But, and it's a big but, when doctors are able to offer treatments that have reasonable chances of positive outcomes, it behooves the rest of us to consider them, and to not turn a blind eye (pardon the expression) to them.

    Notice that I have avoided the hellish minefield that is the pharmaceutical industry. There are far too many issues and outright lies in this strange and diabolical world of vipers to deal with in this post. "Buyer beware!" is as far as I will commit to.

    My position is that, if you (or a loved one) is unfortunate enough to find yourself with a major illness, you should research all possible options for treatment. If you ultimately decide that you'll go for an alternate treatment, fine. Sometimes, and I've seen plenty of examples myself, doctors are fine with recommending the use of both avenues ("It can't hurt.") of care. There is valuable knowledge within the western medical system, knowledge that can save your life if you avail yourself of it.

    As always,

    Namaste, and be well.

    Brian
    Last edited by Fellow Aspirant; 13th April 2018 at 20:37.
    A human being is a part of the whole, called by us "Universe," a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest—a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness.

    Albert E.

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to Fellow Aspirant For This Post:

    BMJ (17th April 2018)

  18. Link to Post #70
    United States Avalon Member A Voice from the Mountains's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th September 2014
    Location
    Appalachia
    Posts
    1,542
    Thanks
    5,157
    Thanked 7,348 times in 1,426 posts

    Default Re: Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint!

    Quote Posted by Fellow Aspirant (here)
    Boy, it's a good thing that neither of us is an expert!

    You spend a lot of time and make considerable effort explaining what a terrible mess western health care is. I agree. MY point is that for all its faults, it sometimes offers the best way to treat certain illnesses. If I break my leg, I'm not going to eschew taking an ambulance to the hospital in favour of going home to drink some herbal tea.
    Who prescribed herbal tea for physical trauma? I've often said that the ONLY time I will go to a doctor is if a bone is sticking out of my body, and I quite literally mean that. I trust them treating physical trauma, to a certain extent. But that's about all.

    Quote And I know that, in one massive study done about five years ago, fully 85% of initial diagnoses are flat out wrong.
    How much worse than that could people like Mike Adams or Dr. Mercola be? They'd have to be wrong pretty much 100% of the time to make an "improvement" over what the orthodox medical establishment is already doing. And for all the disgust you have for Mike Adams, how does the medical establishment NOT disgust you AT LEAST as bad if not more? They kill way more people than Mike Adams ever will. In fact I doubt Mike Adams' advice has ever lead to any deaths at all.

    Usually alternative medicines are non-toxic and completely safe, and the worst you would be risking is self-delusion. And considering the power of the placebo effect, that's not so bad at all! I'm giving you the worst case scenario here!

    Quote What would you say, for example to my daughter, who after 19 years of suffering from the debilitating effects of cystic fibrosis, and whose lungs could only manage to supply 20% of the oxygen required for life?
    I don't know anything in particular about that disease and perhaps you are right that surgery/organ replacement is the best solution, but in general, I would at least try all of the non-dangerous alternatives I could find whether other people thought they were quackery or not. I wouldn't have much to lose really.

    As someone who follows all of these "alternative" people that you think are quacks, I can tell you that most of what they all say is to simply eat foods that deliver all the basic vitamins/nutrients, to regularly cleanse your organs, etc. That actually is the bulk of what ALL of them say that I follow. Notice that this is only "alternative" because establishment doctors tend not to focus on foods, nutrition, or vitamins, because their treatments are almost exclusively oriented towards pills and surgery. No serious person can believe that getting all of your necessary vitamins and minerals or doing organ detoxes is quackery, yet doing exactly that will prevent TONS of diseases. "Prevention" is a word often missing in the western medical vocabulary.

    Quote And your parsing of the critics' opinions into a pile of invalid attacks via their "ad hominem" nature (I assume you are referring to this fallacy, from your use of the strangely abbreviated term 'ad homs'). You are clearly more than a little confused about what an 'ad hominem' attack actually is. It is NOT criticism leveled at someone's position or claim. It is an attack on the person him or herself. Like if someone thought it legitimate to try to obviate Mr. Trump's thinking on the basis of his hair style.
    Calling someone a quack, etc., is exactly what you describe: an attack on the person himself. I know what the term means and I abbreviated it because I am very familiar with it and tend to assume most others are as well. I know it's Latin and it should be in italics also but I stopped putting Latin terms in italics because people know what I mean anyway. Dunning-Kruger effect I suppose.

    Quote While I admit that the words used by the scientists to describe Adams' behaviour are in some cases 'over the top', and descend to the gutter of name calling (which would be an ad hominem attack) I need to direct your attention to the reasons why the scientific community is displeased with his claims. That is, they object to his use of unscientific claims for what they consider to be the truth.
    This is ironic because science is based on experimental data, of which you have shown me none to actually demonstrate that Adams' recommendations are ineffective (again, most of what these guys say is just to eat right). When you posted that big long excerpt, it should have been chocked full of actual data to begin with instead of insult after insult, yes, ad homs, directed at Adams. I don't know why you actually expected a list of ad homs from supposed experts (and even non-experts) to mean something to me in the first place. I've been going against the grain of one thing or another my entire life.

    Quote As such, the negativity regarding someone who is trying to be one of them has struck a few nerves. The anger is further exacerbated by Adams' apparent ability to convince others to seek out his treatments instead of those that are part of the scientific pantheon. So, what I have offered as examples of scientists who disparage Adams are examples of people who disparage his claims, not his hair style. Adams' claims of scientific veracity are simply wrong, and this is what the scientific community has a problem with. There are no ad hominem attacks here.
    So your legalistic argument here is essentially that all of the stuff posted above isn't necessarily ad hom because, for example, they say "what he says is stupid" as opposed to "he is stupid," which btw is not even totally true if you actually re-read what they were saying about him. But in neither case calling names, whether they're directed at him or his unnamed claims, constitutes a rational, let alone a scientific, argument. If you actually want to talk about science then I would ask you post actual data and not a bunch of subjective anecdotes from people who are precisely the people most likely to be wrong according to the study I linked to above. It's a form of bias to be so emotionally invested. The idea of logic and strong emotions not mixing well is what I began our entire exchange with, and I believe on some level you must know this is true.

    Quote And here's where things get really messed up, yes? There is no doubt that western medical science does not have all the right answers. Hell, every discipline of western science can be faulted for rushing down false tunnels of "knowledge" (But that's a whole other thread - or a million).
    You seem to have a much more optimistic view of the medical establishment than I do. You seem to think the establishment as a whole genuinely cares about people and only wants to help. I'm sure many doctors and nurses do care but that's about the extent of it (doctors also commit suicide at incredible rates). I see the medical establishment as an industry focused on profit and which makes the most profit, not from curing illnesses, but making them linger on for as long and as expensively as possible. That means a lot of this misdirected research is not accidental, and there are plenty of "follow-the-money"-type clues to suggest this is precisely the case. If you look into the corrupt practices of the big pharmaceutical companies you will find hundreds of examples of things worse than a simple mistake, and at some point you have to stop believing it's only a few isolated bad apples. There is systematic corruption in this industry.

    That's another thing that I don't understand about your anger. It's directed at someone who is completely harmless compared to the real medical killing machine. I refer you back to the link above, about the medical industry being the 3rd leading cause of death in the US today, and not even counting overdoses and other deaths related to prescription medicine, but simply from other errors they make.

    Quote Notice that I have avoided the hellish minefield that is the pharmaceutical industry. There are far too many issues and outright lies in this strange and diabolical world of vipers to deal with in this post. "Buyer beware!" is as far as I will commit to.
    Well I'm glad you hear this from you and now I think we can begin to find common ground. I would suggest to you that big pharma is not only incredibly corrupt in itself but they have long tentacles reaching into our hospitals. They wine and dine doctors, selling them on the latest pill. You know how it works. It's not a rosy picture. And if I had lots of anger this is where it would be directed, rather than people like Adams or Mercola, etc.

    Quote My position is that, if you (or a loved one) is unfortunate enough to find yourself with a major illness, you should research all possible options for treatment. If you ultimately decide that you'll go for an alternate treatment, fine. Sometimes, and I've seen plenty of examples myself, doctors are fine with recommending the use of both avenues ("It can't hurt.") of care. There is valuable knowledge within the western medical system, knowledge that can save your life if you avail yourself of it.
    Precisely. The only thing I might disagree with you on here is that I'm more skeptical of the establishment doctors than I am of the harmless "eat a bunch of turmeric" etc. etc. remedies that the alternative guys recommend. Because the pills they have given me in the past actually COULD have killed me if I took them, which I refused to do once I looked them up and read about them.

    I think our disagreements are more based on which is the more dangerous crowd here rather than the idea that either alternative or orthodox medicine are going to solve all of our problems, because clearly neither of them are.
    Last edited by A Voice from the Mountains; 15th April 2018 at 03:34.

  19. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to A Voice from the Mountains For This Post:

    BMJ (17th April 2018), Foxie Loxie (15th April 2018), genevieve (15th April 2018), Michelle Marie (15th April 2018), we-R-one (15th April 2018)

  20. Link to Post #71
    Avalon Member genevieve's Avatar
    Join Date
    10th May 2012
    Age
    68
    Posts
    493
    Thanks
    21,164
    Thanked 1,725 times in 408 posts

    Default Re: Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint!

    Without doctors pushing drugs, the pharmaceutical industry would have a tough time hauling in all the billions they lust after. They make a great team, if you like that sort of game.


    Peace Love Joy & Harmony,
    genevieve

  21. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to genevieve For This Post:

    A Voice from the Mountains (15th April 2018), BMJ (17th April 2018), edina (15th April 2018), Foxie Loxie (15th April 2018), Michelle Marie (15th April 2018), we-R-one (15th April 2018)

  22. Link to Post #72
    United States Avalon Member A Voice from the Mountains's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th September 2014
    Location
    Appalachia
    Posts
    1,542
    Thanks
    5,157
    Thanked 7,348 times in 1,426 posts

    Default Re: Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint!

    A very timely article about this aspect of the control system from CNBC:

    Quote Goldman Sachs asks in biotech research report: 'Is curing patients a sustainable business model?'

    Goldman Sachs analysts attempted to address a touchy subject for biotech companies, especially those involved in the pioneering "gene therapy" treatment: cures could be bad for business in the long run.

    "Is curing patients a sustainable business model?" analysts ask in an April 10 report entitled "The Genome Revolution."

    "The potential to deliver 'one shot cures' is one of the most attractive aspects of gene therapy, genetically-engineered cell therapy and gene editing. However, such treatments offer a very different outlook with regard to recurring revenue versus chronic therapies," analyst Salveen Richter wrote in the note to clients Tuesday. "While this proposition carries tremendous value for patients and society, it could represent a challenge for genome medicine developers looking for sustained cash flow."
    https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/11/gold...ess-model.html

    So here they are admitting that actually curing people is an undesirable outcome. They want prolonged illness, because it's the best business model. Another confirmation that it's just psychopaths at the top of the medical industry.


    This all relates to Agenda 21 because the ability for people to own small farms, or even a home garden, and raise their own fresh, organic food, is another threat to the medical regime. Think of all the nasty stuff in junk food people eat every day. It has to have an enormous impact on making people sick and having them go to doctors in the first place.

    Ben Garrison puts it all together beautifully:




    They want to keep us sick, keep us drugged, and cut off all of our recourses to a natural, self-sufficient lifestyle. We need to not only dismantle all Agenda 21 policies but abolish the property tax and encourage more small farming and gardening.



  23. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to A Voice from the Mountains For This Post:

    BMJ (17th April 2018), edina (15th April 2018), Foxie Loxie (15th April 2018), genevieve (16th April 2018), Jayke (15th April 2018), KiwiElf (16th April 2018), Michelle Marie (15th April 2018), we-R-one (15th April 2018)

  24. Link to Post #73
    Canada Avalon Member Fellow Aspirant's Avatar
    Join Date
    6th July 2011
    Location
    Kingston, Ontario
    Age
    67
    Posts
    914
    Thanks
    5,441
    Thanked 4,765 times in 835 posts

    Default Re: Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint!

    Well, here's a quickie response w.r.t. my attitude towards Big Pharma, especially as it's in league with Big Money, as represented by Mssrs. Goldman & Sachs and spells out, in black and white, what we all know but have rarely seen in print:

    "In Goldman Sachs's April 10 report, "The Genome Revolution," its analysts ponder the rise of biotech companies who believe they will develop "one-shot" cures for chronic illnesses; in a moment of rare public frankness, the report's authors ask, "Is curing patients a sustainable business model?"

    The authors were apparently spooked by the tale of Gilead Sciences, who developed a Hepatitis C therapy that is more than 90% effective, making $12.5B in 2015 -- the year of the therapy's release -- a number that fell to $4B this year.

    The analysts are making a commonsense observation: capitalism is incompatible with human flourishing. Markets will not, on their own, fund profoundly effective cures for diseases that destroy our lives and families. This is a very strong argument for heavily taxing the profits of pharma companies' investors and other one percenters, and then turning the money over to publicly funded scientific research that eschews all patents, and which is made available for free under the terms of the Access To Medicines treaty, whereby any country that devotes a set fraction of its GDP to pharma research gets free access to the fruits of all the other national signatories.

    Humans have shared microbial destiny. If there's one thing that challenges the extreme libertarian conception of owing nothing to your neighbor save the equilibrium established by your mutual selfishness, it's epidemiology. Your right to swing your fist ends where it connects with my nose; your right to create or sustain reservoirs of pathogens that will likely kill some or all of your neighbors is likewise subject to their willingness to tolerate your recklessness.

    Goldman Sachs's analysts suggest three "cures" for the problem of one-shot cures; and taxing the rich to fund socialized pharma research isn't among them; rather, they propose eschewing rare diseases, to ensure that the pool of patients is large enough to produce a return on their investment, or developing one-shot cures fast enough to "offset the declining revenue trajectory of prior assets."

    "The potential to deliver 'one shot cures' is one of the most attractive aspects of gene therapy, genetically-engineered cell therapy and gene editing. However, such treatments offer a very different outlook with regard to recurring revenue versus chronic therapies," analyst Salveen Richter wrote in the note to clients Tuesday. "While this proposition carries tremendous value for patients and society, it could represent a challenge for genome medicine developers looking for sustained cash flow."

    Goldman Sachs asks in biotech research report: 'Is curing patients a sustainable business model?' "[Tae Kim/CNBC]

    Yup. Swamp of Evil it is.

    B.
    A human being is a part of the whole, called by us "Universe," a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest—a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness.

    Albert E.

  25. The Following User Says Thank You to Fellow Aspirant For This Post:

    latte (Today)

  26. Link to Post #74
    United States Avalon Member A Voice from the Mountains's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th September 2014
    Location
    Appalachia
    Posts
    1,542
    Thanks
    5,157
    Thanked 7,348 times in 1,426 posts

    Default Re: Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint!

    Quote Posted by Fellow Aspirant (here)
    The analysts are making a commonsense observation: capitalism is incompatible with human flourishing.
    Ahh here we come with the Marxist educational system rearing its head, bashing capitalism at every opportunity.

    Capitalism is responsible for the massive improvement in world living standards from about 1800 until today. Remember what the world was like before 1800?






    What you see above is all the result of the introduction of capitalist systems.

    The industrial revolution? Thank capitalism. Radio? Thank capitalism. Trains? Cars? Television technology? Video? The Internet? Phones? You can thank capitalism for the incentive to invent and mass-produce all of these things, contributing to a much-increased standard of living starting in the West and seeping out to the rest of the world from here.

    I won't even waste my time pointing out for the upteenth time how Marxist systems always end up because if people haven't figured that out by now then they never will.


    Quote Markets will not, on their own, fund profoundly effective cures for diseases that destroy our lives and families.
    Markets are inanimate objects, like guns. They don't do anything by themselves. It's the moral fiber of the society that determines what our priorities are. Why don't people talk about morality anymore? Because it's associated with religion and according to Marxists, all religion is bad and has nothing good to offer anyone. So Marxist academic institutions pump out a bunch of secular materialist atheists and then act confused when no one has morals anymore and is only concerned with the bottom line.

  27. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to A Voice from the Mountains For This Post:

    BMJ (17th April 2018), Foxie Loxie (16th April 2018), Jayke (15th April 2018), KiwiElf (16th April 2018), we-R-one (15th April 2018)

  28. Link to Post #75
    United States Avalon Member we-R-one's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th April 2012
    Location
    Could be Sirius
    Posts
    1,357
    Thanks
    4,245
    Thanked 7,361 times in 1,235 posts

    Default Re: Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint!

    Quote Posted by Fellow Aspirant (here)
    That said, I am still of the opinion that, if carefully approached and researched, one can find practitioners and practices that will not only make one's life more pleasureable, but save it from a premature and grisly end.
    Well the same goes when referring to critics of Mike Adams, double standards don't do us any good. I took a bit of time to take a closer look at some of the critics you felt deemed attention for their viewpoint on Mike's work. Taken from the Wikipedia link you gave in post #66. As you know, Wikipedia can't always be considered reliable in it's sourcing and in this case I find it to be true. Did you take any time to look up the people you were sourcing from the link? I did and I got smacked in bed at 2a.m. in the morning by my husband because I laughed out loud at the ridiculousness of their credibility while he was trying to sleep. Two of these guys are convicted felons! Hardly people of integrity, to use while criticizing another's work....lmao.


    For those who have nothing better to do, enjoy what I pulled up. The people in question have their names underlined. I don't have time to do more than this, and honestly I really don't feel the need to as I'm confident in Mike's work for reasons already stated by A Voice From The Mountains. EDIT TO ADD: That does not mean I think Mike is perfect, everyone can make mistakes. I'm more concerned about someone if they engage in constant malicious behavior.


    Top Pseudo-Skeptic, Steven Novella, Humiliated on National TV… And it was fun to watch…
    http://bolenreport.com/top-pseudo-sk...-fun-to-watch/


    Quackwatch review - Is Stephen Barrett a Quack? Is he fair, balanced, or biased?
    http://www.raysahelian.com/quackwatch.html
    “Is Dr. Stephen Barrett fair in his analysis of nutrition research and those involved in the nutrition industry?

    I have not read every single page or article on Quackwatch and I do not read most of the new pages that are added on the site, but the ones I have read give me the impression that in many cases he has done good research on many of the people involved in the alternative health industry, and has pointed out several instances of inaccuracies and scams (for instance, Hulda Clark and her pitiful book "The Cure for all Cancers"). However, I hardly came across reports on his website regarding some of the scams or inaccurate promotion and marketing practices by the pharmaceutical industry. Why is this? Why has Stephen Barrett, M.D. focused almost all of his attention on the nutritional industry and has hardly spent time pointing out the billions of dollars wasted each year by consumers on certain prescription and non-prescription pharmaceutical drugs? If he truly claims to be a true consumer advocate, isn't it his responsibility to make sure the big scams are addressed first before focusing on the smaller scams? It's like the government putting all of its efforts going after the poor misusing food stamps while certain big companies cheat billions of dollars from consumers with hardly any governmental oversight.

    Why is there no review of Vioxx on Quackwatch? Why is there no mention on quackwatch.org of the worthless cold and cough medicines sold by pharmaceutical companies and drug stores? Hundreds of millions of dollars are wasted each year by consumers on these worthless and potentially harmful decongestants and cough syrups. Why is there no mention on quackwatch of the dangers of acetaminophen use, including liver damage? There are probably more people who are injured or die from over the counter Tylenol and aspirin use each year than from all the natural supplements people take throughout a year. If Dr. Barrett had focused his career on educating people in reducing the use of useless and dangerous prescription and nonprescription drugs (even just one, acetaminophen) he would have helped many more people than attempting to scare people from the use of supplements.

    Another point I would like to make regarding Quackwatch is that Dr. Barrett often, if not the majority of the time, seems to point out the negative outcome of studies with supplements (you can sense his glee and relish when he points out these negative outcomes), and rarely mentions the benefits they provide. A true scientist takes a fair approach, and I don't see this in my review of the Quackwatch website. I subscribe to the Quackwatch newsletter (which often has interesting information) but there is hardly any mention of the benefits of supplements. As an example, see a paragraph from the August, 2006 Quackwatch newsletter mentioned a few paragraphs below.

    Bottom line: Overall, Dr. Barrett does some good in pointing out scams in the alternative health field, but, in my opinion, he is not fair and balanced, and he is not a true objective scientist as he claims to be. Someone who has a website specifically tailored for criticism needs to have a higher and more objective scientific standard, and Barrett fails in this regard.”




    Peter Bowditch: Convicted Felon to be sued by Burzynski
    http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Arch.../msg00608.html

    “No surprise that convicted felon ('80's charge, conviction and incarceration for aggravated assault) Peter Bowditch of Australia is soon be in front of the courts again. Bowditch has been noticed with a "Cease & Desist" order by in-house legal counsel for the Burzynski Clinic in Houston, Texas. In an unusual act of bravery (stupidity), Bowditch has boldy published the "Cease & Desist" demand letter on his hate site. Seems he's following the good example of Stephen Barrett who is currently being sued by Doctors Data Laboratory for $10M US. Bowditch, like Barrett believe they are omnipotent in all matters of science and medicine, immune from recourse, and above the law. They are both about to find otherwise.”

    Web Marketer Facing Prison (Brian Dunning) Claims eBay Turned A Blind Eye To A $35 Million Alleged Fraud
    https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.bus...g-fraud-2014-8
    “A former affiliate marketer for eBay who will start a 15-month federal prison sentence on Sept. 2 for a scam in which up to $35 million was paid out for false online sales leads has written a scathing, detailed account of why he believes eBay ignored the fraud committed against it.

    Both Hogan and Dunning pleaded guilty to wire fraud. Hogan received a five-month prison sentence; Dunning — the author of the rant against eBay— got 15 months.

    Today, just three days before he reports to prison, Dunning wrote on his blog:
    I was a partner in one of those companies, and fully admit my actions, and was convicted and sentenced to federal prison for it.

    He admits receiving between $200,000 and $400,000 in payments from eBay that were the result of cookie-stuffing fraud. Basically, he argues, everyone did it.”



    For more entertainment on Bowditch:
    http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles/onews/gal.htm


    Robert Carroll
    https://jonbarron.org/rebutting-skeptic
    “Several weeks ago, the staff here at the Foundation brought to my attention Robert Carroll's "Skeptic's Dictionary" website that focuses on "exploring strange beliefs, amusing deceptions, and dangerous delusions." High on the site's list is alternative medicine. As the site says, "Some will be harmed by AM [alternative medicine] and many people will benefit from it, but the entire benefit from AM comes from the placebo effect and the reduction of stress hormones due to the calming effect of good ritual" -- a rather sweeping indictment, I must say. In any case, the reason the staff brought it to my attention is that there is now a featured page on the site -- dedicated to me.1 When I read the page, I found it uproariously funny, filled with misstatements, distortion of fact, and packed with innuendo and a number of juvenile comments -- surprising, considering that the site's author is a retired teacher of "logic" and "critical thinking," albeit at a city college. In any case, the staff insisted we craft a response, even though the site has no facility for leaving comments, and the site says that it will only rarely post them anyway. Nevertheless, I wrote one up, which the staff then toned down and sent on to Dr. Carroll (Ph. D.). The rebuttal was never published, and no response to the email was forthcoming from Dr. Carroll.”

    Robert Carroll
    https://www.thetruthaboutamway.com/a...cs-dictionary/
    “One of the most popular “skeptical” resources on the internet is a website (also now a book) by Robert Todd Carroll known as The Skeptic’s Dictionary. Bob Carroll has two articles that relate to Amway, once is titled Amway® (Quixtar®) (Team of Destiny®) (TEAM®) (Network 21) and the other is multi-level marketing (a.k.a. network marketing & referral marketing). Both are full misrepresentations and display a shockingly poor understanding of the business model and how it functions. How has Carroll managed to write such poor articles? Simple – false assumptions and poor research.”



    Quote Posted by Fellow Aspirant (here)
    While I admit that the words used by the scientists to describe Adams' behaviour are in some cases 'over the top', and descend to the gutter of name calling (which would be an ad hominem attack) I need to direct your attention to the reasons why the scientific community is displeased with his claims. That is, they object to his use of unscientific claims for what they consider to be the truth. As such, the negativity regarding someone who is trying to be one of them has struck a few nerves. The anger is further exacerbated by Adams' apparent ability to convince others to seek out his treatments instead of those that are part of the scientific pantheon. So, what I have offered as examples of scientists who disparage Adams are examples of people who disparage his claims, ........
    If we had to rely on these people for our 'scientific' data we're in a lot of trouble.
    Last edited by we-R-one; 16th April 2018 at 18:04.
    "We never left you..."-ELizabeth Marie from the E.T. race The ELohim 5/19/2017

    ........where being the BLACK SHEEP, isn't the exception, it's the rule!

  29. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to we-R-one For This Post:

    A Voice from the Mountains (16th April 2018), BMJ (17th April 2018), Fellow Aspirant (18th April 2018), genevieve (16th April 2018), Jayke (15th April 2018), KiwiElf (16th April 2018), Michelle Marie (15th April 2018)

  30. Link to Post #76
    Canada Avalon Member Fellow Aspirant's Avatar
    Join Date
    6th July 2011
    Location
    Kingston, Ontario
    Age
    67
    Posts
    914
    Thanks
    5,441
    Thanked 4,765 times in 835 posts

    Default Re: Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint!

    WHAT???

    Noooooooooo!!!

    Voice - take a deep breath, my friend! Calm down.

    I find it disconcerting that any comment involving capitalism should elicit such an overblown, negative emotional response on your part. The report, if you wish to, can actually be read as supporting Capitalism. It merely points out, for Goldman Sachs' clients, the best way to make money in the industrial field of pharmacology. I hope that you are not one of those people with trigger issues - those who conflate a topic with an attack.

    What I wish to point out with this post is the way in which the profit motive can be detrimental to the provision of healthcare.

    I do think that the profit principal has no place in healthcare. Or schooling, or prisons, for that matter. In all such areas, the 'clients' are extremely vulnerable.

    But do I think, for the record, that capitalism has been responsible for much of the development of "our" civilization; there is obviously (I hope), a place for the incentive of a profit reward for one's personal efforts.

    What I disagree with is transferring the profit motive to areas of our society that are not (or should not) be about making money. Needless to say, such a philosophy is especially susceptible unfettered greed.

    Unwarranted rants in response to imagined threats will get us into the discussion ditch at lightning speed. So please, let's exercise a little nuance in our thinking, shall we?

    Namaste,

    Brian
    Last edited by Fellow Aspirant; 15th April 2018 at 23:24.
    A human being is a part of the whole, called by us "Universe," a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest—a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness.

    Albert E.

  31. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Fellow Aspirant For This Post:

    A Voice from the Mountains (16th April 2018), gaiagirl (19th April 2018), latte (Today)

  32. Link to Post #77
    United States Avalon Member A Voice from the Mountains's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th September 2014
    Location
    Appalachia
    Posts
    1,542
    Thanks
    5,157
    Thanked 7,348 times in 1,426 posts

    Default Re: Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint!

    Quote Posted by Fellow Aspirant (here)
    I find it disconcerting that any comment involving capitalism should elicit such an overblown, negative emotional response on your part. The report, if you wish to, can actually be read as supporting Capitalism. It merely points out, for Goldman Sachs' clients, the best way to make money in the industrial field of pharmacology. I hope that you are not one of those people with trigger issues - those who conflate a topic with an attack.
    I was actually reacting to this statement of yours: "capitalism is incompatible with human flourishing."

    That is a very broad and unjustified criticism of capitalism if you look at the charts I posted above. Capitalism began to be implemented at the end of the 1700's and that's exactly when common people became empowered for the first time to go out and be entrepreneurs and make their own living without being subject to a feudal lord or some other oppressive system.

    The problem with the medical establishment isn't that it exists in a capitalism system, but that there are immoral people running it. You can pick whatever system you think is ideal, and if immoral people are in charge, you can expect corruption in every case. It's a problem with the "social fabric" and the kinds of values we promote and honor as a society.

    Quote I do think that the profit principal has no place in healthcare. Or schooling, or prisons, for that matter. In all such areas, the 'clients' are extremely vulnerable.
    I agree with this, to a certain extent. If pills actually are the best available treatment for something, then someone should rightfully be paid in exchange for their labor in making those pills, and they should be paid a fair market value in order to maintain a healthy balance of professions. If they are underpaid then they will find another business to go into, and that causes production shortages and other problems. Shortages like that are why you used to see people standing in long lines in the Soviet Union waiting for bread or toilet paper. Over-regulation is another job killer in that respect.

    And if someone is guarding prisoners or building a prison, they of course should get paid for their labor as well. No one should be forced to work for free, because that's the same as slave labor, and what socialism ends up being when the government finally goes broke and yet people are still clamoring that they have a "human right" to a doctor seeing them, etc.

    The problem is that people have to find a way to make a living doing this stuff without being so corrupt and immoral that they are literally encouraging people to be sick for as long as possible just to milk as much money out of them as they can. THAT is definitely wrong and I think people from all sides of the political spectrum can come together on that.

    So the question is, how do you pay the doctors and pill-makers a fair amount of money for their labor, while discouraging them from abusing the system and taking advantage of people?

    I don't know of any easy solutions to that but I'm open to ideas. We used to have a common morality and sense of local community to fall back on but in the post-modern age I don't think that exists so much anymore.

  33. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to A Voice from the Mountains For This Post:

    Bluegreen (16th April 2018), edina (16th April 2018), gaiagirl (19th April 2018), genevieve (17th April 2018), KiwiElf (16th April 2018), turiya (16th April 2018), we-R-one (16th April 2018)

  34. Link to Post #78
    United States Avalon Member we-R-one's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th April 2012
    Location
    Could be Sirius
    Posts
    1,357
    Thanks
    4,245
    Thanked 7,361 times in 1,235 posts

    Default Re: Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint!

    HOT OFF THE PRESS, JUST HAPPENED EARLIER TODAY APRIL 16, 2018

    Earlier today, I caught the dialogue from the round table meeting in Florida while getting ready this morning and felt it was worth posting because I know we all have concerns about the environment. Since dismantling the infrastructure of Agenda 21 is all about deregulation, some fear our environment is no longer going to be protected, which I feel just isn’t true. It was clear to me that the intent was to REVISE AND REFORM as stated in recent EPA documents. Many of the ridiculous policies put into place weren’t for the intent of protecting the environment as already revealed, but rather intended to promote the 'AGENDA' for supporting the 'inventory and control' every aspect of our life ideology.

    Below Trump expresses the intent of his administration. I’m hoping for balanced and common sense thinking to protect our surroundings, while at the same time allowing 'we the people' to prosper.



    “The economy is entering the greatest boom in many decades.” – Larry Kudlow- Director of the National Economic Council

    “We cut regulations at a level that nobody has seen in the history of our country, more than any other president."- President Trump 4/16/2018

    “We have the biggest regulation cut, and I’m not so sure that the regulation cut Marco(in reference to Marco Rubio), isn’t even more important than this massive tax cut, but it’s right up there and we’re continuing to go, so we think that things that would take sometimes two decades to get approved can be done in two years and even one year……and again, if they’re not environmentally good, if they’re not safe, if it’s not great for our water and our air, and all of the things that we watch, and that we think are so important we’re not going to approve it.”- President Trump 4/16/2018


    PRESIDENT TRUMP HOSTS THE TAX CUTS FOR FLORIDA SMALL BUSINESS ROUNDTABLE IN HIALEAH- Quotes taken from video below.

    Last edited by we-R-one; 16th April 2018 at 18:58.
    "We never left you..."-ELizabeth Marie from the E.T. race The ELohim 5/19/2017

    ........where being the BLACK SHEEP, isn't the exception, it's the rule!

  35. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to we-R-one For This Post:

    A Voice from the Mountains (16th April 2018), Bluegreen (16th April 2018), BMJ (17th April 2018), edina (17th April 2018), Fellow Aspirant (16th April 2018), Foxie Loxie (16th April 2018), gaiagirl (19th April 2018), genevieve (17th April 2018), KiwiElf (18th April 2018), Michelle Marie (16th April 2018)

  36. Link to Post #79
    United States Avalon Member A Voice from the Mountains's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th September 2014
    Location
    Appalachia
    Posts
    1,542
    Thanks
    5,157
    Thanked 7,348 times in 1,426 posts

    Default Re: Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint!

    The first environmentalists in the US were not hippy tree huggers, but Christian farmers in the South who took seriously the Bible verses about being good stewards of the Earth, the plants and animals, etc.

    People on the left often seem to have the misconception that conservatives are hellbent on poisoning the soil and air at all costs just because we want to cut through insane regulations that only serve to stifle economic development while doing nothing at all for the environment.

    Example:

    Quote 12 Ridiculous Government Regulations That Are Almost Too Bizarre To Believe

    #1 Private Investigator's License

    The state of Texas now requires every new computer repair technician to obtain a private investigator's license. In order to receive a private investigator's license, an individual must either have a degree in criminal justice or must complete a three year apprenticeship with a licensed private investigator. If you are a computer repair technician that violates this law, or if you are a regular citizen that has a computer repaired by someone not in compliance with the law, you can be fined up to $4,000 and you can be put in jail for a year.

    #2 Business Privilege License... For Bloggers

    The city of Philadelphia now requires all bloggers to purchase a $300 business privilege license. The city even went after one poor woman who had earned only $11 from her blog over the past two years.

    #3 Funeral Director License for Monks

    The state of Louisiana says that monks must be fully licensed as funeral directors and actually convert their monasteries into licensed funeral homes before they will be allowed to sell their handmade wooden caskets.

    #4 Teeth Brushing Regulation

    In the state of Massachusetts, all children in daycare centers are mandated by state law to brush their teeth after lunch. In fact, the state even provides the fluoride toothpaste for the children.

    #5 D.C. Tour Guide License

    If you attempt to give a tour of our nation's capital without a license, you could be put in prison for 90 days.

    #6 Raw Milk License

    Federal agents recently raided an Amish farm at 5 A.M. in the morning because they were selling "unauthorized" raw milk.

    #7 Pumpkin and Christmas Tree Vendor License

    In Lake Elmo, Minnesota farmers can be fined $1,000 and put in jail for 90 days for selling pumpkins or Christmas trees that are grown outside city limits.

    #8 Untangling Whale Restriction

    A U.S. District Court judge slapped a $500 fine on Massachusetts fisherman Robert J. Eldridge for untangling a giant whale from his nets and setting it free. So what was his crime? Well, according to the court, Eldridge was supposed to call state authorities and wait for them do it.

    #9 Interior Design License

    In the state of Texas, it doesn't matter how much formal interior design education you have - only individuals with government licenses may refer to themselves as "interior designers" or use the term "interior design" to describe their work.

    #10 Additional 1099s to File

    Deeply hidden in the 2,409-page health reform bill passed by Congress was a new regulation that will require U.S. businesses to file millions more 1099s each year. In fact, it is estimated that the average small business will now have to file 200 additional 1099s every single year. Talk about a nightmare of red tape! But don't try to avoid this rule - it is being reported that the IRS has hired approximately 2,000 new auditors to audit as many of these 1099s as possible.

    #11 License to Close a Business

    The city of Milwaukee, Wisconsin makes it incredibly difficult to go out of business. In order to close down a business, Milwaukee requires you to purchase an expensive license, you must submit a huge pile of paperwork to the city regarding the inventory you wish to sell off, and you must pay a fee based on the length of your "going out of business sale" plus a two dollar charge for every $1,000 worth of inventory that you are attempting to sell off.

    #12 Labeling Products with Calorie Counts

    The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is projecting that the food service industry will have to spend an additional 14 million hours every single year just to comply with new federal regulations that mandate that all vending machine operators and chain restaurants must label all products that they sell with a calorie count in a location visible to the consumer.

    This isn't funny anymore

    The following short video produced by the Institute for Justice examines some more examples of completely ridiculous regulations across the United States. The video is very funny, but please keep in mind that all of this red tape is absolutely killing many very real businesses....
    http://www.businessinsider.com/ridic...rnment-2010-11


    These are just the tip of the iceberg, and many of these are state rather than federal regulations. Federal agencies have unconstitutionally enacted de facto legislation through regulations such as these across an enormous range of issues, often only serving corrupt interests, cronyism, even treasonous intentions of disadvantaging American industries on behalf of foreign interests.

    When Trump is talking about cutting through massive amounts of regulatory red tape, this is the kind of nonsense he is talking about, and anyone who has had to go through any of this red tape for any reason knows exactly what he means.

  37. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to A Voice from the Mountains For This Post:

    BMJ (17th April 2018), edina (17th April 2018), Fellow Aspirant (18th April 2018), gaiagirl (19th April 2018), genevieve (17th April 2018), KiwiElf (18th April 2018), we-R-one (16th April 2018)

  38. Link to Post #80
    United States Avalon Member we-R-one's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th April 2012
    Location
    Could be Sirius
    Posts
    1,357
    Thanks
    4,245
    Thanked 7,361 times in 1,235 posts

    Default Re: Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint!

    Quote Posted by A Voice from the Mountains (here)
    People on the left often seem to have the misconception that conservatives are hellbent on poisoning the soil and air at all costs just because we want to cut through insane regulations that only serve to stifle economic development while doing nothing at all for the environment.
    Yes it falls under what I call the 'sky is falling' mentality when I see the freak out response by environmental groups over the Trump Administrations restructuring revisions. The Sierra Club and others are watching their entire falsified 'legacies' crumble.

    From a past post I wrote:

    The 14 Most Influential Sustainability NGOs
    https://www.sustainabilitydegrees.co...nability-ngos/
    How lovely, careers and degree opportunities which indoctrinate members of the community to play the Simon Says game. Oh lookey Sierra Club is listed as #11! Oooh it's the master number!!!

    "Sierra Club: Founded in 1892 by conservationist John Muir, the Sierra Club is one of the oldest and largest environmental organizations in the U.S. It has protected millions of acres of wilderness and has helped to pass key environmental legislation, including the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act. It’s also leading efforts to move away from the use of fossil fuels."

    Awww too bad, they'll have to re-edit the above as the 'key' environmental legislation the Clean Water Act is no longer being implemented executive order 13783...boo hoo .....NOT!
    "We never left you..."-ELizabeth Marie from the E.T. race The ELohim 5/19/2017

    ........where being the BLACK SHEEP, isn't the exception, it's the rule!

  39. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to we-R-one For This Post:

    A Voice from the Mountains (18th April 2018), BMJ (17th April 2018), gaiagirl (19th April 2018), genevieve (17th April 2018), KiwiElf (18th April 2018), turiya (17th April 2018)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 1 4 5 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts