All posts by TiLT News

The Freedom to speak honestly and from your heart is being eradicated. Truth is being skewed and creating a reality that none recognize. Criminals freed reek havoc. Law and order, the thin line between chaos and order are all on the chopping block. Your way of life is changing and not for the better. It takes ONE generation to flip any civilized society by indoctrinating your children and removing your connection to God. WHAT are you going to do about it! Spread the word.

Bilderberg 2015: The Real Agenda

Global elite’s secret plan revealed

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
June 9, 2015

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFFDSRVC9-Y]

Find out the global elite’s real agenda and what is being discussed at the secretive 2015 Bilderberg conference.

Facebook @ https://www.facebook.com/paul.j.watson.71
FOLLOW Paul Joseph Watson @ https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet

*********************

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor at large of Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com.

This article was posted: Tuesday, June 9, 2015 at 2:02 pm

TiLTNews Network

Flashback: Bilderberg Decides World’s Political, Economic Policies, Says NATO Secretary-General

Taxpayers are coughing up the millions spent on security for the Bilderberg Group they’re not allowed to know about

Kit Daniels
Prison Planet.com
June 9, 2015

Bilderberg attendees are mandated to implement the political and economic decisions made during the secretive meeting, former NATO Secretary-General and Bilderberg member Willy Claes admitted in 2010.

Credit: Alpine Luftbild / Wiki

Highlighting the Bilderberg Group’s undemocratic nature, Claes said that attendees are normally given around 10 minutes of talk time and then receive a summarization of what’s been discussed during the meeting and are expected to use it when setting policies in the political and economic spheres in which they have influence.

“The participants are then obviously considered to use this report in setting their policies in the environments in which they affect,” Claes stated in an interview with a Belgian radio station, which was first reported by Paul Joseph Watson.

Even more shocking, Claes added that Bilderberg attendees are not allowed to sit next to each other more than once at the meeting to ensure the maximum exchange of opinions.

“This represents a solid confirmation of what we already knew through witnessing Bilderberg’s leaked agenda later play out in the real world time after time – that the elitist organization does verbally set global policy in a completely undemocratic and illegal manner,” Watson wrote.

Yesterday the Austrian Federal Police had set up a Chernobyl-style exclusion zone to keep the public and reporters away from the Interalpen Hotel where the Bilderberg Group will begin its meeting on Thursday.

  • A D V E R T I S E M E N T

At its peak, the exclusion zone extended at least 10 km (6.2 miles), and assuming it was a 10 km circle, the area was over three times the size of Manhattan.

The police later backed off, however, by moving their roadside checkpoints closer to the hotel, although still several miles away.

“The area around the meetings is put into complete lockdown,” Jon Stone with the Independent reported. “There is no need to rely on private security: national governments of host countries cooperate fully and provide police protection.”

Meaning that taxpayers are coughing up the millions spent on security for the Bilderberg Group they’re not allowed to know about even though the private meeting sets political and economic policies for their country.

If this isn’t tyranny, what is?

Follow on Twitter:
@RealAlexJones | @KitDaniels1776

This article was posted: Tuesday, June 9, 2015 at 2:22 pm

TiLTNews Network

Bilderberg To Discuss Capital Controls on Consumers While HSBC Pays $40 Million Money Laundering Fine

Do as we say, not as we do

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
June 9, 2015

The powerful Bilderberg Group will discuss imposing more capital controls on average citizens while HSBC, whose Group Chairman will attend the conference, is set to pay more than $40 million dollars for illegal money laundering involving arms dealers and helping the wealthy avoid taxes.

It’s very much a case of do as we say, not as we do.

Douglas Flint, Group Chairman of HSBC Holdings, will attend the elitist confab in Telfs-Buchen, Austria this week along with Stuart Levey, HSBC’s Chief Legal Officer and Rona Fairhead, an HSBC director and Chairwoman of the BBC Trust.

The transnational bank was just ordered by Geneva authorities to pay 40 million Swiss francs (around $43 million dollars) for its Swiss subsidiary’s involvement in illegal money laundering activities during which, “HSBC’s Swiss arm banked the proceeds of political corruption and accepted deposits from arms dealers while helping wealthy people evade taxes,” reports the London Guardian.

In 2012, HSBC agreed to pay U.S. authorities $1.9 billion dollars after a Senate investigation found the bank had been a conduit for “drug kingpins and rogue nations.”

Ironic therefore it is that HSBC representatives will be party to discussions at Bilderberg centered around moving towards the abolition of cash and the imposition of capital controls on ordinary citizens in the name of stopping tax fraud and allowing more state control over people’s finances.

During the conference, Bilderberg will set the consensus for green lighting economic restrictions under the justification of stopping financing for terror groups like ISIS. Bilderberg will also discuss new controls on the sale of precious metals throughout Europe.

Numerous influential voices have recently called for eliminating physical currency altogether, giving central banks and governments the power to directly control your finances under the justification of preventing an economic collapse and bank runs.

At its most authoritarian extreme, this means having to obtain government permission every time you withdraw or spend a moderately large sum of money.

France is already set to introduce laws in September which will restrict French citizens from making cash payments over €1,000 euros. France’s Special Adviser on Financial and Economic Affairs to the President Laurence Boone will attend Bilderberg 2015.

Former Bank of England economist Jim Leaviss, penned an article for the London Telegraph last month in which he said a cashless society would only be achieved by “forcing everyone to spend only by electronic means from an account held at a government-run bank,” which would be, “monitored, or even directly controlled by the government.”

Banks in the United States and United Kingdom have also intensified policies that treat the deposit and withdrawal of relatively large amounts of cash as a suspicious activity.

Citigroup Chief Economist Willem Buiter recently advocated abolishing cash altogether in order to “solve the world’s central banks’ problem with negative interest rates.”

Last year, Harvard University’s Kenneth Rogoff also called for “abolishing physical currency” in order to stop “tax evasion and illegal activity” as well as preventing people from withdrawing money when interest rates are close to zero. Harvard Professor of Economics Martin Feldstein is on the official attendee list for this year’s Bilderberg conference.

Buiter and Rogoff recently gave presentations at a secret meeting in London during which they advocated, “the elimination of all cash to bring to fruition the day when you cannot buy or sell anything without government approval,” according to economist Martin Armstrong.

Facebook @ https://www.facebook.com/paul.j.watson.71
FOLLOW Paul Joseph Watson @ https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet

*********************

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor at large of Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com.

This article was posted: Tuesday, June 9, 2015 at 6:01 am

TiLTNews Network

Soros Pushes US Bailouts and Weapons for Ukraine

written by ron paul sunday june 7, 2015

undefined
If you look at the track record of the interventionists you might think they would pause before taking on more projects. Each of their past projects has ended in disaster yet still they press on. Last week the website Zero Hedge posted a report about hacked emails between billionaire George Soros and Ukrainian President Poroshenko.
Soros is very close to the Ukrainian president, who was put in power after a US-backed coup deposed the elected leader of Ukraine last year. In the email correspondence, Soros tells the Ukrainian leadership that the US should provide Ukraine “with same level of sophistication in defense weapons to match the level of opposing force.” In other words, despite the February ceasefire, Soros is pushing behind the scenes to make sure Ukraine receives top-of-the-line lethal weapons from the United States. Of course it will be up to us to pay the bill because Ukraine is broke.
But Soros seems to have the money part covered as well. In an email to Ukrainian leaders, he wrote that Ukraine’s “first priority must be to regain control of financial markets.” Soros told Poroshenko that the IMF would need to come through with a $15 billion package, which was confident would lead the Fed to also come through with more money. He wrote: “the Federal Reserve could be asked to extend a $15 billion three months swap arrangement with the National Bank of Ukraine. That would reassure the markets and avoid a panic.”
How would the Fed be convinced to do that? Soros assured Poroshenko: “I am ready to call Jack Lew of the US Treasury to sound him out about the swap agreement.”
So George Soros will use his influence in the US government to put the American people on the hook for a bankrupt Ukraine — forcing us to pay for weapons, more military training, and Ukraine’s crippling debt.
Who is thrilled with Soros’ drawing the US government into more intervention in the region? The military-industrial complex for one is happy at the prospect of big weapons “sales” to Ukraine. The bankers are thrilled. Washington power-brokers are thrilled. There is something in this for everyone who is politically well-connected. The only losers are the people who will be forced to pay for it, the American taxpayers.
No one seems to ask why we are involved in Ukraine at all. Is it really any of our business if the east wants to break away from the west? Is it a vital US interest which flag the people wish to hang in Donetsk?
One thing we should be sure of is that Ukraine’s debt will not be paid. As in other bailouts, much of it will be transferred to the US taxpayer through the IMF and the Federal Reserve. All of this is only possible because of the perception that the dollar is still the world’s reserve currency. But this too is coming to an end. US military and financial interventionism worldwide are only speeding up the process.


Copyright © 2015 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.
Please donate to the Ron Paul Institute

Related
TiLTNews Network

Google Exec Behind Ingestible ID Chips to Attend Bilderberg 2015

Former DARPA director Regina Dugan to discuss artificial intelligence with global power brokers

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
June 8, 2015

Former DARPA director and now Google executive Regina Dugan, who is helping to develop and promote the idea of an ingestible identification microchip, will be in attendance at the secretive 2015 Bilderberg conference in Telfs-Buchen, Austria.

Dugan’s name appeared on the official list of participants released today on the Bilderberg Group’s official website. One of the topics up for discussion will be “artificial intelligence.” Google Chairman Erich Schmidt along with Demis Hassabis, Vice President of Engineering for Google DeepMind, will also meet with over 100 global power brokers from finance, politics and academia during the elitist confab.

Dugan told an audience at the 2013 All Things D11 Conference that the company was working on a microchip inside a pill that users would swallow daily in order obtain the “superpower” of having their entire body act as a biological authentication system for cellphones, cars, doors and other devices.

“This pill has a small chip inside of it with a switch,” said Dugan. “It also has what amounts to an inside out potato battery. When you swallow it, the acids in your stomach serve as the electrolyte and that powers it up. And the switch goes on and off and creates an 18 bit ECG wide signal in your body and essentially your entire body becomes your authentication token.”

Dugan added that the chip had already been FDA approved and could be taken 30 times a day for someone’s entire life without affecting their health.

Dugan’s former position as director of DARPA, which many see as the leading force in a malevolent move towards a Big Brother surveillance society, is sure to stoke even more concern amongst privacy advocates.

“What in the world does Google have planned that it’s hiring military leadership?” asked The Wire’s Adam Clark Estes, noting that her appointment illustrated Google’s “tight connections with military leadership.”

DARPA has also been developing brain chips that will implant or remove specific memories from a subject, heralding the beginning of a “golden age” where minds could be manipulated to function better.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk caused consternation last month when he expressed his fear that Google cofounder Larry Page will be responsible for creating artificial technology that could eventually rise up and destroy humankind.

“I’m really worried about this,” Musk is quoted as saying in his recently released biography, remarking, “He could produce something evil by accident.”

I will be joining Infowars’ Rob Dew and Josh Owens to cover the Bilderberg conference this week. Dew and Owens received a friendly welcome when they tried to drive towards the luxury Interalpen Hotel – a police checkpoint and an impromptu inspection of their vehicle.

Infowars.com will have full detailed coverage of Bilderberg’s 2015 agenda throughout the week.

Facebook @ https://www.facebook.com/paul.j.watson.71
FOLLOW Paul Joseph Watson @ https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet

*********************

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor at large of Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com.

This article was posted: Monday, June 8, 2015 at 7:22 am

TiLTNews Network

Bilderberg Backs Hillary For 2016 Presidency

Chief Hillary advisor to attend secret confab

Steve Watson Prisonplanet.com June 8, 2015

The Bilderberg 2015 Conference, scheduled to take place this weekend in Austria will focus, at least in part, on “American elections,” according to a press release on the secretive cabal’s very limited public website.

The factoid appeared along with a list of attendees, one of whom is Jim Messina of The Messina Group – who just happens to be a chief advisor to Hillary Clinton. Messina also heads up the super PAC Priorities USA, which supported Obama and is now firmly in the Clinton camp.

Messina also spearheaded Barack Obama’s reelection campaign in 2012, and has just come back to the US after leading the deeply unpopular UK prime minister David Cameron to a surprise majority victory in British elections.

“I’m coming home tomorrow and it’s whatever it will take to get Hillary [elected],” Messina said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” program a month ago.

See here:

Messina’s presence at Bilderberg will be focused around ensuring none of Hillary’s potential challengers get the big bucks from the innumerable transnational banks and corporations that will also be represented at Bilderberg.

In 2008, the Bilderberg Group met with both Clinton and Obama, in secret in Northern Virginia, while the nation’s press were shunted on to a plane in the belief that the President was traveling back to Washington.

It is believed that the group endorsed Obama over Hillary, as a more immediate candidate, with the plan being that Hillary would essentially pick up as president for a third Obama term.

Bilderberg luminary and top corporate elitist James A. Johnson also had a direct hand in selecting Obama’s running mate for the 2008 election, acting as kingmaker for America’s then future President.

Johnson also selected John Kerry’s running mate John Edwards in 2004 after Edwards had impressed Bilderberg elitists Henry Kissinger and David Rockefeller with a speech he gave at the globalist confab in Italy that year.

Hillary has a deep rooted connection to the Bilderberg elitists.

Her husband Bill Clinton attended the 1991 meeting in Germany shortly before becoming President and he attended again in 1999 when the conference was held in Sintra, Portugal (despite Clinton’s lie that he had not attended in 15 years).

Hillary herself was rumored to have attended the 2006 meeting in Ottawa, Canada.

—————————————————————-

Steve Watson is a London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’ Infowars.com, and Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham, and a Bachelor Of Arts Degree in Literature and Creative Writing from Nottingham Trent University.

This article was posted: Monday, June 8, 2015 at 11:42 am

TiLTNews Network

Bilderberg 2015: Police Harass Reporters, Search Vehicle, Visit Hotel

Checkpoints set up six miles away from site of elitist confab

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
June 8, 2015

Infowars reporters Rob Dew and cameraman Josh Owens were harassed by Austrian federal police at a checkpoint six miles away from where the secretive Bilderberg Group will meet later this week, with cops even visiting them at their hotel to check their passports.

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-IMg-iQ2NE]

Dew and Owens arrived in Telfs near to where the globalist confab is taking place to discover an unprecedented security operation in full swing days before Bilderberg members even arrive at the remote location in the Austrian alps.

Attempting to drive to their hotel, the two were quickly apprehended at a checkpoint a short distance up the mountain from Telfs where their passports, drivers license and booking papers were checked by police, who then demanded to perform a full inspection of their rented vehicle.

Dew and Owens were then confronted by police as they tried to access their hotel before subsequently being approached by no less than eight federal police who again asked to check their passports and interrogated the reporters.

As we previously reported, police are already patrolling hike and bike trails well away from the luxury Interalpen-Hotel Tyrol where the Bilderberg Group meeting begins on Thursday.

The full agenda and participant list has already been released by the official Bilderberg website. Infowars will be revealing more details about the agenda later today.

Infowars will be providing full coverage of Bilderberg 2015 throughout the week.

Facebook @ https://www.facebook.com/paul.j.watson.71
FOLLOW Paul Joseph Watson @ https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet

*********************

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor at large of Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com.

This article was posted: Monday, June 8, 2015 at 11:50 am

TiLTNews Network

Deutsche Bank CEOs step down under fire

John Bacon and Mike Snider, USA TODAY 1:43 p.m. EDT June 7, 2015

EPA FILE GERMANY DEUTSCHE BANK EBF FINANCIAL & BUSINESS SERVICES DEU HE

(Photo: Boris Roessler, EPA)

The co-chief executives of embattled German banking giant Deutsche Bank (DB), Anshu Jain and Jürgen Fitschen, are stepping down, the bank announced Sunday.

Germany’s largest bank issued a statement saying its supervisory board “decided at an extraordinary meeting today” to appoint John Cryan, 54, to the position of co-chief executive officer, effective July 1.

The move follows Deutsche Bank’s agreement less than two months ago to pay $2.5 billion to settle charges brought by U.S. and British authorities that it manipulated benchmark interest rates between 2005 and 2009.

Cryan has been on the bank’s supervisory board since 2013 and previously has served as chairman of the audit committee and was a member of the risk committee. He will step down from the supervisory board when he becomes co-CEO.

“He knows the bank well, and we are convinced that he is the right person at the right time,” said Deutsche Bank supervisory board chairman Paul Achleitner in the bank’s statement.

John Cryan will succeed Jain in July 2015 and will

John Cryan will succeed Jain in July 2015 and will become the sole CEO in May 2016. (Photo: Steffen Schimidt, AP)

Cryan was president for Europe at Singaporean investment company Temasek from 2012 to 2014. Before that, Cryan was chief financial officer of UBS from 2008 to 2011.

His appointment followed the decision of Fitschen and Jain to “step down early from their roles,” the bank said. Jain will stay until June 30, and the board asked him to remain as a consultant through year’s end. The board “asked Mr. Fitschen to remain in his current role until the conclusion of the annual general meeting on May 19, 2016, to help ensure a smooth transition.”

Both CEOs’ contracts were due to run through March 31, 2017.

USA TODAY

Deutsche Bank to pay $2.5B for Libor rate violations

Two weeks ago, Deutsche Bank agreed to a $55 million settlement with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission over misstated paper losses of at least $1.5 billion during the global financial crisis.

That agreement came after the settlement charges in April, which included payments of $600 million to the New York State Department of Financial Services, $800 million to the Commodities Futures Trading Commission, $775 million to the U.S. Department of Justice, and $340 million to the United Kingdom’s Financial Conduct Authority.

USA TODAY

Deutsche Bank agrees to $55M SEC penalty

Also in April, Deutsche Bank announced a reorganization that involved spinning off its Postbank branches in Germany, closing offices in some countries and eliminating less profitable business at its investment banking division.

The bank’s leadership drew shareholder anger at its annual meeting last month amid concerns over disappointing profit growth, the fines and the restructuring plans. Hermes Equity Ownership Services, a major stakeholder, had called for management changes.

Achleitner said the current CEOs’ agreement to step down “demonstrates impressively their attitude of putting the bank’s interests ahead of their own.”

He lauded Cryan, saying he is “not only a seasoned banker with extensive experience in financial matters but also espouses the professional and personal values required to advance Deutsche Bank.”

Deutsche Bank “is a special institution,” Cryan said in the bank’s statement. “Our future will be defined by how well we deliver on strategy, impress clients and reduce complexity.”

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2015/06/07/deutsche-bank-ceos-step-down/28641471/

TiLTNews Network

Organic Takeover: Toxic Food Makers Lose $4 Billion in Sales in One Year

As organic food takes over the toxic food supply

food_soup_campbells_loss_735_350-3

Christina Sarich

by Christina Sarich
Posted on June 6, 2015

Consumers are leaving toxic food makers’ products behind on grocery store shelves faster than you can say ‘organic.’ Big Food lost $4 billion in sales last year alone due to their inability to answer market demand for non-GM, organic food that doesn’t contain high fructose corn syrup, gluten, antibiotics, growth hormones, MSG, and other toxic additives. Meanwhile, organic food is absolutely exploding.

Big Food has a multi-billion dollar problem on their hands, and this is why they have spent so much money trying to defeat GMO labeling bills in multiple states – but they can’t get around the awakening public’s demand for better food. It is staring them right in the face.

Company’s like ConAgra (don’t let the ‘con’ in their name dissuade you) want to remake their image. So do big food makers like Smuckers and Campbell Soup Co.

“We understand that increasing numbers of consumers are seeking authentic, genuine food experiences,” said Campbell Soup Co CEO, whose stock is currently trading down, “and we know that they are skeptical of the ability of large, long-established food companies to deliver them.”

These CEOs pretend not to know why consumers don’t trust them. Could it be that they have fought against public requests to deliver real, non-genetically modified, or toxic additive-laden food for years, to no avail? Could it be because they have spent millions trying to keep the public from even knowing what is in their food?

Just how irrelevant are these companies becoming? An analysis by Moscow found that the top 25 US food and beverage makers have lost an equivalent of $18 billion of market share. That’s a big loss, and when you consider that organic food sales are slated for immense growth this year, and in the next decade, you’d think they would have taken the mild hints we’ve given them.

“Their existence is being challenged,” says Edward Jones analyst Jack Russo of the major packaged-food companies. Shoppers still value the convenience that food processing offers, says Moskow, “but the pendulum has definitely shifted in their minds. They [consumers[ have more and more questions about why this bread lasts 25 days without going stale.”

Too bad Big Food was hitting the snooze button. They can eat their toxic leftovers for breakfast, maybe, while looking over the Wall Street Journal at their failing stock prices – just take a look at McDonald’s as a shining example of how the food movement is igniting change.

Additional Sources:

Featured image credit: Fortune (modified)


Storeable Food

Stock up on the ONLY 100% USDA organic storable food available through the Natural Society Store. 30 days of super high quality organic food for the lowest prices.


About Christina Sarich:
Christina Sarich is a humanitarian and freelance writer helping you to Wake up Your Sleepy Little Head, and See the Big Picture. Her blog is Yoga for the New World. Her latest book is Pharma Sutra: Healing the Body And Mind Through the Art of Yoga.

Other Popular Stories:
  1. Pharmaceutical Sales Rise 2.4%,Top $307 Billion in Sales in 2010
  2. 6 Proofs Food Makers Don’t Care About Children (or You)
  3. Sorry Monsanto: Organic Food Demand is Absolutely Exploding
  4. Follow the Money: BPA Makers to Gross $8 Billion Thanks to FDA Rejecting Ban
  5. Why is a Known Toxic Substance Allowed in Organic Foods?
  6. Organic, Non-GMO Fast Food Drive-Thrus? It Isn’t a Dream. It’s Happening

Read more: http://naturalsociety.com/toxic-food-makers-lose-4-billion-in-sales-in-one-year/#ixzz3cK1LbDFm
Follow us: @naturalsociety on Twitter | NaturalSociety on Facebook

TiLTNews Network

How Governments Keep You (and Your Money) From Leaving

Giving up citizenship costs more now than ever before

How Governments Keep You (and Your Money) From Leaving

by Ryan McMaken | Mises.org | June 5, 2015


The IRS reports that more people renounced their US citizenshipduring the first quarter of 2015 than during any other quarter in history.

Notably, a sizable portion of those renouncing their citizenship are doing so to escape heavy taxation. The United States is the only country other than the military dictatorship of Eritrea that taxes its citizens living abroad on all forms of income.

Interestingly, it is the wealthy (i.e., generally the most economically productive members of society) who are leaving permanently, and the fact that the US is driving out its wealthiest members is not a good sign for the long-term prospects for the country. It is also the opposite of what happens in a country with a healthy respect for private property and basic human freedoms.

Overcoming Barriers to Exit

Specifically, the IRS reports that 1,335 American citizens gave up their citizenship forever during the first quarter. During 2014, more than 3,400 did the same. This is only a tiny portion of the total population of American citizens, although this does not count the much larger group of expatriates who remain citizens.Three million of them leave the country per year. Nor do the numbers include long-term residents who give up residency.

The overall numbers giving up citizenship, remain small, but it’s actually startling that the number is as large as it is. Giving up citizenship costs more now than ever before. CNN reports that “the government increased the renunciation fee to $2,350, more than four times what it used to cost. … On top of that, some U.S. citizens are slapped with a giant ‘exit tax’ bill — sometimes millions of dollars — when they renounce. … The tax pain can last for years, with some former Americans on the hook for additional payments decades after they renounce.”

And, once renunciation is complete, US law enables the US Attorney General to bar former citizens from ever re-entering the country again if the government decides that the former citizen left to avoid paying taxes. Theexperience of Eduardo Saverin illustrates the many barriers and pitfalls related to renouncing citizenship.

So, renouncing citizenship may not only bring large monetary expenses, but may mean one can no longer visit friends and family in the United States ever again.

Clearly, the US government isn’t exactly trying to cut the cost for emigrants. And why would any state ever want to ease the process of emigrating for those with money and valuable skills? It is to the state’s advantage to capture as much as it can in terms of capital and human resources as possible.

The Option of Escape

In fact, it has been the relative ease-of-exit that has served as a check on government power throughout much of history, and the relative ease with which the most productive members of society could escape more oppressive regimes was an important factor in the economic and political development of Europe.

Ralph Raico, in his essay “The Theory of Economic Development and the European Miracle,” examined how the small size of states, and the lack of significant barriers to relocation for merchants and other taxpayers, was central to the rise of economic prosperity and ideologies of liberty and private property. When a prince proposed to raise taxes, Raico observed, the most productive members of society would move their wealth and themselves to neighboring jurisdictions where princely expropriation was lighter. Raico writes:

Although geographical factors played a role, the key to western development is to be found in the fact that, while Europe constituted a single civilization — Latin Christendom — it was at the same time radically decentralized. In contrast to other cultures — especially China, India, and the Islamic world — Europe comprised a system of divided and, hence, competing powers and jurisdictions.

Within this system, it was highly imprudent for any prince to attempt to infringe property rights in the manner customary elsewhere in the world. In constant rivalry with one another, princes found that outright expropriations, confiscatory taxation, and the blocking of trade did not go unpunished. The punishment was to be compelled to witness the relative economic progress of one’s rivals, often through the movement of capital, and capitalists, to neighboring realms. The possibility of “exit,” facilitated by geographical compactness and, especially, by cultural affinity, acted to transform the state into a “constrained predator.”

Decentralization of power also came to mark the domestic arrangements of the various European polities. Here feudalism — which produced a nobility rooted in feudal right rather than in state-service — is thought by a number of scholars to have played an essential role. … Through the struggle for power within the realms, representative bodies came into being, and princes often found their hands tied by the charters of rights (Magna Carta, for instance) which they were forced to grant their subjects. In the end, even within the relatively small states of Europe, power was dispersed among estates, orders, chartered towns, religious communities, corps, universities, etc. …

In other words, a system of a large number of small jurisdictions — compounded by decentralization within the jurisdictions themselves — led to an inability on the parts of rulers to easily control the movement of persons and capital.

Unfortunately, however, we see little in common between the modern United States and the Europe described by Raico.

In addition to direct legal costs imposed by the US government itself, the American state also benefits from informal barriers imposed by demographics and geography. For example, nearly 80 percent of native English speakers live within the United States, and this imposes a practical barrier to exit since exit is likely to require that the emigrant learn a new language. Furthermore, the sheer size of the United States ensures that emigration requires that the emigrant move hundreds, if not thousands, of miles away from friends and family. The fact that the US borders only two countries further ensures a lack of choice when seeking “nearby” regimes that may be more favorable to the emigrant’s likes. Differences in climate (Canada is cold and very dark in winter) and the fact that one may not be welcomed by foreigners add further to the incentives against relocation.

For the potential emigrant, then, the repercussions of relocation are enormous and daunting, and quite unlike the European merchant of the middle ages, described by Raico, who can escape the edicts of one prince by taking up residence among others — who speak the same language and practice the same religion — fifty miles down the river.

Love it or Leave It?

During the Vietnam War, supporters of the war invented the slogan “Love It or Leave It” as an epithet against those who opposed the war or other perceived injustices perpetrated by the American state. The assumption is that if one doesn’t like the US government, one should just go to some other country. A similar slogan (in Portuguese) was also employed by the military dictatorship in Brazil.

Undoubtedly, many who do not “love it” would “leave it” if leaving did not involve such an enormous life change.

To illustrate this, let’s indulge in a thought experiment in which a secession movement splits the United States into two independent pieces, with the boundary at the Mississippi River. In such a scenario, citizens of the two countries would suddenly find themselves with two countries from which to choose, with both choices offering similar climates, cultural amenities, and languages. Relocation from one to the other would also place emigrants no further away than a short plane ride or automobile trip. The populations of cities along the border, such as St. Louis and Minneapolis would boom as residents attempted to pick and choose among opportunities offered on both sides of the border.

Obviously, if secession then continued to other jurisdictions, and the old US is broken up into several or even dozens of new jurisdictions, the choices among regimes available to residents would multiply. Emigration would become a much less daunting affair (especially for those with money and assets who would be welcomed by other jurisdictions) and one would be far more likely to make the plunge based on economic considerations.

Naturally, states are well aware of these realities too, which is why the federal government works tirelessly to supersede the variety offered by state laws with uniform federal law on everything from banking to gay marriage. In spite of all of this, people still “vote with their feet” by moving from high tax states, cities, and counties to low-tax states, cities, and counties. The feds tolerate this because they have the all-important income tax, capital gains taxes, and more. Try to escape those taxes, and you’ll find you won’t “love it.”

TiLTNews Network

UN “Death Targets” Will Mean Reduced Healthcare for Elderly

`Written by  Alex Newman

Elderly people in the United Kingdom and potentially worldwide are likely to be treated as “second-class citizens” and even denied life-saving medical treatment under proposed “highly unethical” United Nations “death targets,” healthcare and aging experts declared in an open letter last week. The radical UN “Sustainable Development Goals,” which would put virtually every realm of human activity in the crosshairs, include, among other controversial provisions, proposed global “targets” for reducing premature deaths from various causes. To meet those targets, the experts said, government-run healthcare systems such as the U.K. “National Health Service” (NHS) are likely to focus more resources on easier-to-save younger people — at the expense of the elderly whose deaths would not be counted as “premature.” Some critics are even saying the plan heralds the advent of “death panels.”

Officially dubbed the UN “Post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals,” the plot being pushed by the UN and its member regimes represents a brazen attack on liberty, self-government, markets, national sovereignty, and more — all under the guise of “solving” all of the world’s real and imagined problems. The death targets are merely one tiny component that includes everything from “education” and values to food and health. The specific “Sustainable Development Goals,” set to replace the “Millennium Development Goals” established in 2000, are still being hammered out by UN bureaucrats and UN member regimes. Everything from “ending poverty” and “ending hunger” to “achieving gender equality” and “reducing income equality within and between countries” over 15 years is on the agenda. Imagine the coercive powers and the massive amount of resources required to even attempt such scheming.

GetUsOut-banner

Now, at least one component of the agenda — the age discrimination in healthcare — is coming under heavy criticism in the United Kingdom. In the open letter published by the prominent medical journal The Lancet and widely reported in the British press, the international coalition of experts lambasted the sought-after UN goal and demanded that it be scrapped or revised. Blasting the ideas as “agist” — discrimination against individuals based on their age — the signatories argued that the concept of “premature mortality” has the potential to “undermine the cherished, fundamental principle of health as a universal right for all.” The letter specifically criticizes a previous article on the subject that it says is based on “ethical principles” that “are deeply troubling” — namely, “that people aged 70 years and above do not matter.”

The signatories also argue that agist discrimination is already strong in areas such as cancer treatment even in high-income countries, and the situation is worse still in poorer nations. In the U.K., as The New American and many other sources have been documenting for years, the government-run healthcare monopoly known as NHS is already infamous for killing off the elderly and denying necessary care to patients. Last year, the U.K. Royal College of Surgeons, stating what was already well known, declared that elderly patients were being denied crucial treatment and operations due to such discrimination, according to British media reports. A few years before that, a British doctor warned that the socialist-style NHS was euthanizing as many as 130,000 patients each year through a controversial end-of-life “care” method called the Liverpool Care Pathway (LCP).  

According to the letter in The Lancet, even if it is not the intent of those promoting the premature death targets, the inclusion of such goals in the UN “Sustainable Development Goals,” set to be adopted in September, “will inevitably reinforce the ageist bias that pervades many aspects of health-care decision making.” “A chronologically exclusive premature mortality target sends out a strong signal that years lived beyond a given age, such as 60 years or 70 years, are intrinsically less valuable than those of a younger person,” the letter states. “This misconception builds on a flawed tradition in health-care priority setting, which includes an explicit bias against older people (as opposed to people of so-called economically and socially productive ages).”    

The experts on aging who signed the letter — associated with the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, the Institute for Ageing and Health at Newcastle University, the Alzheimer’s Society, Age UK, and HelpAge — were led by Peter Lloyd-Sherlock. Speaking to the U.K. Telegraph, the professor of social policy and international development at the University of East Anglia said: “This premature mortality target is highly unethical, since it unjustifiably discriminates against older people.” He also noted that there is already age discrimination in cancer care and surgery, but that the UN targets would give the agism the “stamp of approval.” However, the targets are “not quite set in stone yet, so we have a final opportunity to impress upon the UN the need to alter this explicitly ageist health target.” If that does not happen, he warned ominously, “people aged 70 and over will become second-class citizens as far as health policy is concerned.”       

Lost amid the whole debate over the UN death targets and agism in healthcare, though, are several crucial overarching questions that must be addressed and are more important even than the discrimination debate. First of all, why is the UN — widely and properly ridiculed as the “dictators club” for its autocratic membership roster — setting “targets” and making 15-year “agendas” that will influence or even dictate national policy to begin with? Are the British and their elected representatives incapable of governing themselves without UN “targets” to guide their decisions? As the British struggle to free themselves from the European Union super-state, why is it accepted as inevitable that the UN’s “Sustainable Development Goals” will guide U.K. policy on healthcare or anything else? Allowing Third World dictators to tell the once proud British people how to run their affairs should be seen as a disgrace — and it should be firmly rejected.   

Second of all, why is the government involved in healthcare to begin with? Are citizens incapable of making their own medical decisions and looking after their own health without the nanny state? Considering the atrocious track record of the socialist-style NHS regime, it is way past time for the United Kingdom to abolish socialized medicine and allow the free market to work its magic. Allowing government to ration and control medical care — whether based on UN death targets or the whims of homegrown politicians and bureaucrats — has been shown conclusively to be a disaster, not to mention immoral. From euthanizing the elderly and urging them to sign “do not resuscitate” directives, to being consistently unable to meet the needs of patients, it is time for the NHS and similar socialized medicine regimes to be tossed on the ash heap of failed ideas with devastating and deadly consequences.      

Finally, with the ongoing disaster that is the deeply unpopular “ObamaCare,” are Americans traveling down the same dark road as the British? Absolutely. As the outlandish and impossibly expensive “Affordable Care” system implodes in on itself, and costs continue to spiral out of control thanks to government intervention, calls are growing for a full-blown socialized system to take its place. Even without a so-called “single payer system,” though, ObamaCare represents a de facto nationalization of healthcare in America. And with the tacit support from the GOP majority in Congress, which continues to fund ObamaCare despite deceitful promises to voters and harsh rhetoric, Americans can look forward to a nightmarish healthcare future of rationing, discrimination against the elderly, no more privacy, and more — at least if nothing changes.

To solve many of the most urgent healthcare problems would be relatively simple — dismantle socialized medical systems, withdraw from the UN, and return to the eternal principles of liberty, responsibility, and national independence. However, for that to happen, the British and American publics must get educated, organized, and active, all in the face of a massive propaganda campaign by the UN. The alternative to stopping it — UN death targets, death panels, government rationing, “sustainable” tyranny, and more — must be crushed for the benefit of all.

CFSOC-banner3

Alex Newman, a foreign correspondent for The New American, is normally based in Europe. Follow him on Twitter @ALEXNEWMAN_JOU. He can be reached at anewman@thenewamerican.com.

Related articles:

UN and Media Plan “Sustainable Development” Propaganda Blitz

Doctor: British Health Service Euthanizes 130,000 Patients a Year

The Real Agenda Behind UN “Sustainability” Unmasked

UN Plots Future of Education: Creating Green “Global Citizens”

Killing the Elderly Is Old News for Britain’s NHS

UN Plotting to “Dramatically Alter” Your Views and Behavior

England’s NHS Incapable of Meeting Patient Needs

U.K.’s NHS Urges Elderly to Sign “Do Not Resuscitate” Directives

ObamaCare Causing Millions of Americans to Lose Their Current Health Plans

The New World of ObamaCare

TiLTNews Network

TPP Begins to Unravel as Obama Launches Final Push For Votes

“Please just tell us what is in TPP”

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
June 5, 2015

The Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade package is beginning to unravel, with more prominent voices slamming President Obama and the Republican leadership over the secretive deal that threatens to cost American jobs and hand big corporations new powers that would violate national sovereignty.

House Majority Whip Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) and Rules Committee chairman Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX) refused to reveal to Breitbart whether they had read the TPP agreement but still said they would support the Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) and allow President Barack Obama to fast-track the TPP.

Lawmakers claim that TPA is separate from TPP and that they will review the final TPP agreement before it is considered by Congress.

However, as Matthew Boyle explains, this explanation doesn’t wash. A vote for the TPA is a de facto green light for the TPP since there is essentially no way to halt a trade deal once it has been fast-tracked.

“Since fast track was created in the Richard Nixon administration, not one trade deal that started on fast track has been thwarted. As such, a vote for TPA is a vote for TPP, since passing TPA will all but guarantee the successful passage of TPP,” writes Boyle.

Senator Marco Rubio, Senator Lindsey Graham, and Rep. John Boehner are also refusing to reveal if they have visited the “secret room” to read the controversial TPP document, although all three are set to vote for the TPA.

“It is unforgivable for the Republican majority to shirk its congressional duty and refuse to read the text of a bill that will give Obama unprecedented authority over our economy,” said Daniel Horowitz, the senior editor of the Conservative Review. “Passing a bill in order to find out what’s in it is what placed the Pelosi Congress in the ash-heap of history. It’s not an auspicious path for ambitious politicians.”

Obama is in the midst of an intense lobbying campaign to promote the TPP in advance of a crucial House vote on TPA next week which could go either way.

“The push from the president included direct calls to lawmakers, interviews with television stations in key states and plans to bring several Democrats aboard Air Force One with him to a summit in Germany this weekend,” reports the Washington Post.

Hewlett-Packard CEO and 2016 Republican presidential candidate Carly Fiorina became the latest prominent voice to urge Obama to release the full text of TPP.

“President Obama has made lofty promises before and we’ve learned with this White House that the devil is in the details,” said Fiorina. “And the details are frequently very different than the lofty goals with which he describes the deal. So I’d like President Obama to tell us what’s in his trade deal before we grant him this broad fast track authority. So far, though, he’s been unwilling to do that and Hillary won’t even take a position on it. That should concern us. Mr. President, if you want TPA to pass, please just tell us what is in TPP.”

Meanwhile, despite claims that climate change mandates would not be a part of TPP, President Obama admitted during an NPR interview on Wednesday that this would indeed be the case.

“If we want to solve something like climate change, which is one of my highest priorities, then I’ve got to be able to get into places like Malaysia, and say to them, this is in your interest. What leverage do I have to get them to stop deforestation? Well part of the leverage is if I’m in a trade relationship with them that allows me to raise standards,” said Obama.

By passing such mandates via the TPP, Obama could sneak through draconian climate regulations under the radar, knowing that they would almost certainly be rejected by Congress on their own.

This would satisfy calls by the likes of French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius – a Bilderberg member – to enforce the new rules via global treaties to cut Congress out of the equation. Obama will attend summit in Paris in December to negotiate a climate agreement.

“Obama would not need to get Congress to approve the unfair climate change treaty terms that he negotiates. Instead, he could get the Commission set up by the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement to add those terms to the Trans-Pacific Partnership,” writes Howard Richman.

“After that, the Investor-State Dispute Settlement Provisions, set up by that agreement, could enforce Obama’s terms through the threat of multi-billion-dollar fines upon the U.S. government.”

Critics of the TPP assert that the trade deal will cost American jobs and give huge corporations the power to change U.S. laws.

Earlier this week, Wikileaks released 17 different documents related to the Trade in Services Agreement (Tisa), which is part of the TPP.

Facebook @ https://www.facebook.com/paul.j.watson.71
FOLLOW Paul Joseph Watson @ https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet

*********************

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor at large of Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com.

This article was posted: Friday, June 5, 2015 at 9:03 am

TiLTNews Network

ICYMI: Sen. Cruz: Obama Administration Demonstrates Contempt for the Law

Treasury witnesses avoid hearing to investigate illegal Obamacare rulemaking process

June 4, 2015

http://youtu.be/mj9oolUJa2U

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mj9oolUJa2U]

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) today held a hearing in the Judiciary Subcommittee on Oversight, Agency Action, Federal Rights and Federal Courts to examine the Department of Treasury’s rulemaking that has disregarded the text of the law and illegally enabled the IRS to provide federal Obamacare subsidies to millions of Americans. Sen. Cruz invited Treasury officials, but they refused to attend.

“I wanted to take just a few minutes to discuss the empty table before us.  It is a symbol for how little regard the Obama Administration has for the American people,” Sen. Cruz said.

He continued, “This is fundamentally about the question of whether the federal government can impose billions of dollars of taxes upon millions of Americans directly contrary to the text of federal law. It is likewise about whether the federal government can spend billions of dollars explicitly prohibited by federal law. If the answer to both of those questions is yes, if the Administration’s interpretation is acceded to, it makes the entire constitutional law-making function superfluous.”

Sen. Cruz concluded, “These penalties coming from the individual mandate disproportionally hurt the most vulnerable among us. The people being hurt by these illegal taxes… are young people, they are single moms, they are Hispanics, they are African Americans, that are suddenly finding a big tax bill that is due from an administration that is ignoring and violating federal law to extract illegal taxes.”

Though the first panel failed to attend, the second panel consisted of the following legal and health care experts: Michael A. Carvin, partner at Jones Day; Michael F. Cannon, Director of Health Policy Studies at the Cato Institute; Andy Grewal, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Iowa College of Law; Elizabeth B. Wydra, Chief Counsel of the Constitutional Accountability Center; and Robert N. Weiner, partner at Arnold & Porter LLP.

Last week, Sen. Cruz sent a letter to U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Jacob Lew regarding the department’s refusal to supply key witnesses for the hearing and stating that he may have “no choice but to pursue other options, including compulsory process.”

View the full hearing here. View Sen. Cruz’s opening statement here and see transcript below:

“Before we get into the substance of this hearing, I wanted to take a few minutes to discuss the empty table in front of us.  It is a symbol of just how little regard the Obama Administration has for the American people.

“Two weeks ago, the committee sent a letter to three current employees of the U.S. Treasury Department, requesting their attendance at this hearing to talk about Treasury’s role in developing the Obamacare exchange subsidy rule, which is hurting millions of people across this country, and which is directly contrary to the statutory text of the underlying bill.

“Specifically, this committee sent letters to Mark Mazur, who is the Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy at Treasury; Emily McMahon, who is the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy at Treasury, and who was serving as the Acting Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy when the rule was written and finalized; and to Cameron Arterton, who is the Deputy Tax Legislative Counsel for Tax Policy at Treasury.

“Shortly after these invitation letters were sent, the Treasury Department reached out to my staff and brazenly indicated they did not intend to send any witnesses.  I would note our former Attorney General Eric Holder, the first Attorney General to be held in contempt of Congress, these three empty seats demonstrate the ongoing contempt for Congress and for the American people that is manifested by the Obama Administration.

“For the Treasury Department to tell the United States Senate they have no time, they will not even answer questions about how they promulgated rulemaking in direct conflict with statutory text is the height of arrogance. The beginning of this hearing was to give them an opportunity to come and answer questions, to recognize the oversight responsibility given to the Senate, given to Congress by the United States Constitution. By their absence, I take it the Administration is saying they are not subject to oversight, and yet at the end of the day, the American people provide the ultimate oversight.

“Given that the Administration refused to cooperate in this hearing, it is my hope that the full committee will take it to the next level by invoking compulsory process so that members of the Executive Branch will be made to answer whether they tried to follow the law or whether they were instructed by political operatives to disregard the law in the interest of a political outcome.

“That’s a question the executive needs to answer, and the purpose of this hearing is to begin getting to the bottom of it. I can understand why the Administration is reluctant to engage in this discussion, I can understand why both in substance, after over five years of Obamacare, we have seen that millions of people are hurting under it.

“The American people were promised by the President, if you like your health insurance plan you can keep your health insurance plan, well millions of people discovered that promise was false, that it was knowingly, deliberately false, as millions of Americans had their health insurance plans canceled. The president promised the American people if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor, that we now know was a statement that was knowingly, deliberately false.

“Today as a consequence of Obamacare, millions of Americans have lost their jobs, have been forced into part-time work, have lost their health insurance, have lost their doctors, and are facing skyrocketing insurance premiums.

“So I can understand why the Administration would be reluctant to defend that record on the merits. I can also understand why the Administration does not want to answer questions about the underlying legal question. The statutory text is straightforward and at the end of the day it is not a complicated question, what the administration did is took statutory language of an exchange established by a state and, through transmogrification that would make Harry Houdini shake his head in wonderment, defined the federal government’s exchange as an exchange established by a state.

“The question this hearing and the next panel hopefully will get to, is: Was that an attempt by an executive agency to follow the law, to carry out the President’s constitutional obligation, to take care that the laws be faithfully executed. Or was it instead a deliberate effort to ignore the law, driven by political and partisan objectives from political appointees at the Treasury Department and the White House. This is a question of exceptional importance because if the executive refuses to implement the laws that are passed by Congress then the basic protections of our constitution become ephemeral. That’s the purpose of this hearing, and I’m disappointed that the Administration has chosen not even to engage in this conversation. With that I’ll recognize the ranking member Senator Coons.” 

###

TiLTNews Network

Monsanto Bids to Take over Syngenta—a Move to Assure a Pesticide-Saturated Future?

May 26, 2015 | 252,616 views

Visit the Mercola Video Library

By Dr. Mercola

Monsanto recently made a bid to take over European agrichemical giant Syngenta, the world’s largest pesticide producer. The $45 billion bid was rejected, but there’s still a chance for a merger between these two chemical technology giants.

Monsanto is reportedly considering raising the offer, and as noted by Mother Jones,1 “combined, the two companies would form a singular agribusiness behemoth, a company that controls a third of both the globe’s seed and pesticides markets.”

As reported by Bloomberg,2 the possibility of Monsanto taking over Syngenta raises a number of concerns; a top one being loss of crop diversity.

“…[A] larger company would eventually mean fewer varieties of seeds available to farmers, say opponents such as [science policy analyst at the Center for Food Safety, Bill] Freese.

Another is that the combined company could spur increased use of herbicides by combining Syngenta’s stable of weed killers with Monsanto’s marketing heft and crop development expertise.

‘Two really big seed companies becoming one big seed company means even less choice for farmers,’ said Patty Lovera, assistant director of Food and Water Watch, a policy group in Washington.

‘From a public health and environmental perspective this is a complete disaster,’ said Bill Freese… ‘The more I look at this, the more it worries me and the more it needs to be opposed.’”

What’s in a Name?

According to one analyst, the takeover might boost Monsanto’s reputation, as Syngenta has been “less publicly enthusiastic” about genetically engineered (GE) crops.

Personally, I don’t foresee Monsanto ever being able to shed its toxic reputation, no matter how it tries to rebrand itself. It recently tried to do just that by declaring itself “sustainable agriculture company.”

But actions speak louder than mere words, and there’s nothing sustainable about Monsanto’s business. Taking on the Syngenta name would do nothing to change the obnoxious dichotomy between Monsanto’s words and deeds.

In fact, Mother Jones astutely notes that by trying to acquire Syngenta, Monsanto contradicts “years of rhetoric about how its ultimate goal with biotech is to wean farmers off agrichemicals.”

It’s quite clear Monsanto has no desire or plans to help farmers reduce the use of crop chemicals. On the contrary, it has and continues to push for the increased use of its flagship product, Roundup.

Roundup Also Being Used to Harvest Non-GMO Crops

Not only has Monsanto created a line of GE Roundup-ready seeds, it also promotes the use of Roundup on conventional crops, pre-harvest, as described in its Pre-Harvest Staging Guide.3

Applying herbicide directly before harvesting helps dry the crop, boosts the release of seed, and is said to promote long-term control of certain weeds.

The practice is known as desiccation, and according to researchers Samsel and Seneff,4 the desiccation of conventionally grown wheat appears to be linked to the rapid and concurrent rise in celiac disease.

Applying glyphosate, which was recently classified as a Class 2A probable human carcinogen, on crops directly before harvest is one of the dumbest things we could do to our foods, yet Monsanto wholeheartedly supports and promotes it.

Speaking of reputation, Syngenta is hardly a poster child for sustainability and right action either. Not only is it the main supplier of the “gender-bending” herbicide atrazine in the US, it also makes neonicotinoids—a class of insecticide linked to the mass die-offs of bees and other pollinators

Both of these chemicals have come under increasing scrutiny as researchers have learned more about their environmental and human health impacts, and both are banned in Europe while still widely in use in the US.

Suppressing Science for the Chemical Industry?

As scrutiny into the effects of chemicals has intensified, so has strong-arm tactics by the industry, which has successfully infiltrated the very agencies charged with their oversight.

An open letter5 signed by more than 25 farmworker, environmental, and food safety organizations was sent to the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) on May 5, demanding the agency investigate reports of retaliation and suppression of research relating to the dangers of neonicotinoids and glyphosate.6

“It is imperative that the USDA maintains scientific integrity and does not allow for harassment, censorship, or suppression of findings that counter the interests of industry,” the letter states.

In March, the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) filed a citizen petition requesting that the US Department of Agriculture adopt new policies that would further job protection for government scientists who question the health and safety of agricultural chemicals.

The petition urges for the agency to adopt policies that would specifically prevent the ‘political suppression or alteration of studies and lay out clear procedures for investigating allegations and of scientific misconduct.’

PEER has found that more than 10 USDA scientists have faced consequences or investigations when their work called into question the health and safety of agricultural chemicals.

These scientists documented clear actions that violated their scientific integrity, including USDA officials retracting studies, watering down findings, removing scientists’ names from authorship, and delaying approvals for publication of research papers.”

Many Elementary School Children at Risk of Elevated Pesticide Exposure

Monsanto’s marketing materials still proclaim its GE crops reduce the need for pesticides, but usage has steadily and significantly risen since the advent of GE seeds. The rapid emergence of resistant superweeds have led the industry to invent crop seeds resistant to even more toxic herbicides, such as 2,4-D and dicamba.

According to Dr. Medardo Ávila-Vázquez,7 a pediatrician and neonatologist at the Faculty of Medical Sciences at the National University of Córdoba, glyphosate use in connection to GMO seeds is having a notably deleterious effect on the health of the local people, particularly children.

In light of the approval of these next-generation pesticides, it would behoove us to take notice to such warnings, because our kids are also becoming increasingly exposed. As reported by Global Research,8 children attending hundreds of elementary schools across the US are in harm’s way as toxic weed killers are doused on nearby GE fields in ever greater amounts:

“A new EWG interactive map shows the amounts of glyphosate sprayed in each US county and tallies the 3,247 elementary schools that are located within 1,000 feet of a corn or soybean field and the 487 schools that are within 200 feet. Click on any county on the map to see how much GMO corn and soy acreage has increased there as well as the number of nearby elementary schools.”

You will see that several states are outlined. This is where the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has approved the use of Dow AgroSciences’ Enlist Duo. This new herbicide, which is a mix of glyphosate and 2,4-D, will be used on a new generation of GE corn and soybeans engineered to withstand both of these toxins. Many of these states are already heavily sprayed with Roundup, and with the introduction of Enlist Duo, children who go to school near these farm fields may be exposed to greater risks than ever before.

The Organic Effect

While environmental exposure is certainly a concern, most people are exposed to pesticides via their diet. Claimed to be the largest of its kind, a study9 published in the Environmental Health Perspectives looked at the diets of nearly 4,500 people living in six US cities, assessing exposure levels to organophosphates (OPs), which are among the most commonly used pesticides on American farms.

Participants’ organophosphate levels were estimated using USDA data10 on the average levels of pesticide residue found in the fruits and vegetables that each individual reported eating. To verify the accuracy of their estimates, they compared their calculated pesticide exposures to the actual levels of pesticide metabolites (breakdown products) excreted in the urine of a subset of 720 participants.

Not surprisingly, those who ate conventionally grown produce were found to have high concentrations of OP metabolites, whereas those who ate organic produce had significantly lower levels. Those who “often or always” ate organic had about 65 percent lower levels of pesticide residues compared to those who ate the least amount of organic produce. According to lead author Cynthia Curl: “The study suggests that by eating organically grown versions of those foods highest in pesticide residues, we can make a measurable difference.”

The “organic effect” was also recently demonstrated by a Swedish family that agreed to eat nothing but organic food for two weeks. 11 Pesticide levels were measured before and after the switch, and after a fortnight of eating an all-organic diet, the family members’ toxic load had diminished to virtually nothing. While many organic foods have been shown to contain higher levels of nutrients,12,13,14 one of the major benefits you reap from eating organic is what you don’t get from your diet—all those toxic chemicals!

A Stanford University meta-analysis15 published in 2012 found that people who eat an organic diet not only tend to have lower levels of toxic pesticides in their system, organic meats were also far less likely to contain multi-drug resistant bacteria, which is yet another major health threat.

Many still insist we don’t know what the health ramifications are from eating pesticide-tainted foods, but common sense will tell you the effect is not going to do your health any favors. Many pesticides also do have well-established health effects. Organophosphate (OP) pesticides, for example, have been linked to reduced IQ and attention deficits in children.16,17 Symptoms of exposure include weakness, headache, diarrhea, nausea, and vomiting.

Long-term exposure has been linked to neurological effects, such as18 confusion, anxiety, and depression. According to data19 from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), more than 75 percent of the US population has detectable levels of OPs in their urine, and unless you’re a farmer, or live near a farm, your diet is one of the most likely routes of exposure. Considering depression affects one in 10 Americans, who’s to say OP pesticide exposure isn’t part of the problem?

Shopper’s Guide to Pesticides in Produce

To protect your health, your best bet is to buy only organic fruits and vegetables. That said, not all conventionally grown fruits and vegetables are subjected to the same amount of pesticide load. One way to save some money while still lowering your risk is by focusing on purchasing certain organic items, while “settling” for others that are conventionally grown. To do this, I recommend familiarizing yourself with the Environmental Working Group’s (EWG) annual Shoppers’ Guide to Pesticides in Produce.20

Of the fruits and vegetables tested by the EWG for the 2015 guide, the following “dirty dozen” had the highest pesticide load, making them the most important to buy or grow organically. Also remember that swapping your regular meat sources to organic, grass-fed/pasture-raised versions of beef and poultry may be even more important than buying organic fruits and vegetables. The same goes for dairy products and animal by-products such as eggs.

Apples
Peaches
Nectarines

Strawberries
Grapes
Celery

Spinach
Sweet bell peppers
Cucumbers

Cherry tomatoes
Imported snap peas
Potatoes

In contrast, the following foods were found to have the lowest residual pesticide load, making them the safest bet among conventionally grown vegetables. Note that a small amount of sweet corn and most Hawaiian papaya, although low in pesticides, are genetically engineered (GE). If you’re unsure of whether the sweet corn or papaya is GE, I’d recommend opting for organic varieties. To review the ranking of all foods tested, please see the EWG’s 2015 Shoppers’ Guide to Pesticides in Produce.21

Avocado
Sweet corn
Pineapple

Cabbage
Frozen sweet peas
Onions

Asparagus
Mangoes
Papayas (non-GMO. Most Hawaiian papaya is GMO)

Kiwi
Eggplant
Grapefruit

Cantaloupe
Cauliflower
Sweet potatoes

Where to Find Healthy Food

One of the most compelling reasons to eat organic is to avoid toxins. Organic foods do tend to have a better nutritional profile, but even if they do not, the absence of drugs, pesticides, hormones, and antibiotics is more than enough of a reason to make the switch to protect your health. For a step-by-step guide to making healthier diet choices, please see my freely available optimized nutrition plan, starting with the beginner plan.

While many food stores carry organic foods these days, your best bet is to source it from a local grower, as much of the organic food sold in grocery stores is imported. Not only has this food traveled a long distance, adding to the carbon footprint, but some countries may have more lax organic standards than others.

Buying local food also supports local farmers and promotes the establishment of a more sustainable local food system. If you reside in the US, the following organizations can help you locate farm-fresh foods in the vicinity of where you live. Even better would be to grow it yourself. The nation’s health would radically improve if we could reestablish World War II Victory gardens.

Weston Price Foundation22— has local chapters in most states, and many of them are connected with buying clubs in which you can easily purchase organic foods, including grass fed raw dairy products like milk and butter.

Local Harvest — This Web site will help you find farmers’ markets, family farms, and other sources of sustainably grown food in your area where you can buy produce, grass-fed meats, and many other goodies.

Farmers’ Markets — A national listing of farmers’ markets.

Eat Well Guide: Wholesome Food from Healthy Animals — The Eat Well Guide is a free online directory of sustainably raised meat, poultry, dairy, and eggs from farms, stores, restaurants, inns, and hotels, and online outlets in the United States and Canada.

Community Involved in Sustaining Agriculture (CISA) — CISA is dedicated to sustaining agriculture and promoting the products of small farms.

FoodRoutes — The FoodRoutes “Find Good Food” map can help you connect with local farmers to find the freshest, tastiest food possible. On their interactive map, you can find a listing for local farmers, CSAs, and markets near you.

What Are GMOs?

GMOs are a product of genetic engineering, meaning their genetic makeup has been altered to induce a variety of “unique” traits to crops, such as making them drought-resistant or giving them “more nutrients.” GMO proponents claim that genetic engineering is “safe and beneficial,” and that it advances the agricultural industry. They also say that GMOs help ensure the global food supply and sustainability. But is there any truth to these claims? I believe not. For years, I’ve stated the belief that GMOs pose one of the greatest threats to life on the planet. Genetic engineering is NOT the safe and beneficial technology that it is touted to be.

Help Support GMO Labeling

The Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA)—Monsanto’s Evil Twin—is pulling out all the stops to keep you in the dark about what’s in your food. For nearly two decades, Monsanto and corporate agribusiness have exercised near-dictatorial control over American agriculture. For example, Monsanto has made many claims that glyphosate in Roundup is harmless to animals and humans. However, recently the World Health Organization (WHO) had their research team test glyphosate and have labeled it a probable carcinogen.

Public opinion around the biotech industry’s contamination of our food supply and destruction of our environment has reached the tipping point. We’re fighting back. That’s why I was the first to push for GMO labeling. I donated a significant sum to the first ballot initiative in California in 2012, which inspired others to donate to the campaign as well. We technically “lost the vote, but we are winning the war, as these labeling initiatives have raised a considerable amount of public awareness.

The insanity has gone far enough, which is why I encourage you to boycott every single product owned by members of the GMA, including natural and organic brands. More than 80 percent of our support comes from individual consumers like you, who understand that real change comes from the grassroots.

Recently, Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan) has reintroduced a bill (HR 1599) that would preempt states’ rights to enact GMO labeling laws. This bill would create a federal government program to oversee guidelines for voluntary labeling of products that do not contain GMOs. It would specifically prohibit Congress or individual states from requiring mandatory labeling of GMO foods or ingredients. It would also allow food manufacturers to use the word “natural” on products that contain GMOs. TAKE ACTION NOW! Your local representatives need to hear from you! Please contact them today by CLICKING HERE.

Thankfully, we have organizations like the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) to fight back against these junk food manufacturers, pesticide producers, and corporate giants.

Internet Resources Where You Can Learn More

Non-GMO Food Resources by Country

Together, Let’s Help OCA Get The Funding They Deserve

Let’s Help OCA get the funding it deserves. I have found very few organizations who are as effective and efficient as OCA. It’s a public interest organization dedicated to promoting health justice and sustainability. A central focus of the OCA is building a healthy, equitable, and sustainable system of food production and consumption.

Please make a donation to help OCA fight for GMO labeling.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2015/05/26/glyphosate-pesticide-exposure.aspx?

TiLTNews Network

Prison Planet.com » Investors Start To Panic As A Global Bond Market Crash Begins

 

Investors Start To Panic As A Global Bond Market Crash Begins

Michael Snyder

Economic Collapse June 4, 2015

Is the financial collapse that so many are expecting in the second half of 2015 already starting?

Many have believed that we would see bonds crash before the stock market crashes, and that is precisely what is happening right now.  Since mid-April, the yield on 10 year German bonds has shot up from 0.05 percent to 0.89 percent.  But much of that jump has come this week.  Just a couple of days ago, the yield on 10 year German bonds was sitting at just 0.54 percent.  And it isn’t just Germany – bond yields are going crazy all over Europe.  So far, it is being estimated that global investors have lostmore than half a trillion dollars, and there is much more room for these bonds to fall.  In the end, the overall losses could be well into the trillions even before the stock market collapses.

I know that for most average Americans, talk about “bond yields” is rather boring.  But it is important to understand these things, because we could very well be looking at the beginning of the next great financial crisis.  The following is an excerpt from an article by Wolf Richter in which he details the unprecedented carnage that we have witnessed over the past few days…

On Tuesday, ahead of the ECB’s policy announcement today, German Bunds sagged, and the 10-year yield soared from 0.54% to 0.72%, drawing a squiggly diagonal line across the chart. In just one day, yield increased by one-third!

Makes you wonder to which well-connected hedge funds the ECB had once again leaked its policy statement and the all-important speech by ECB President Mario Draghi that the rest of us got see today.

And today, the German 10-year yield jump to 0.89%, the highest since October last year. From the low in mid-April of 0.05% to today’s 0.89% in just seven weeks! Bond prices, in turn, have plunged!  This is the definition of a “rout.”

Other euro sovereign bonds have gone through a similar rout, with the Spanish 10-year yield soaring from 1.05% in March to 2.07% today, and the Italian 10-year yields jumping from a low in March of 1.03% to 2.17% now.

What this means is that the central banks are losing control.

In particular, the European Central Bank has been trying very hard to force yields down, and now the exact opposite is happening.

This is very bad news for a global financial system that is absolutely teeming with red ink.  Since the last financial crisis, our planet has been on the greatest debt binge of all time.  If we are moving into a time of higher interest rates, that is going to cause enormous problems.  Unfortunately, CNBC says that is precisely where things are headed…

The wild breakout in German yields is rocking global debt markets, and giving investors an early glimpse of the uneasy future for bonds in a world of higher interest rates.

The shakeout also carries a message for corporate bond investors, who have snapped up a record level of new issuance this year, and are now seeing negative total returns in the secondary market for the first time this year.

So why is this happening?

Why are bond yields going crazy?

According to the Wall Street Journal, financial regulators in Europe are blaming the ECB’s quantitative easing program…

A recent surge in government bond market volatility can be blamed on the quantitative easing program of the European Central Bank, according to one of Europe’s top financial regulators.

EIOPA, the body responsible for regulating insurers and pension funds in the European Union, has warned that the ECB’s decision to buy billions of euros’ worth of sovereign bonds, to kick-start the region’s economy, has caused markets to become choppier.

And actually this is what should be happening.  When central banks start creating money out of thin air and pumping it into the markets, investors should rationally demand a higher return on their money.  This didn’t really happen when the Federal Reserve tried quantitative easing, so the Europeans thought that they might as well try to get away with it too.  Unfortunately for them, investors are starting to catch up with the scam.

So what happens next?

Well, European bond yields are probably going to keep heading higher over the coming weeks and months.  This will especially be true if the Greek crisis continues to escalate.  And unfortunately for Europe, that appears to be exactly what is happening

Greece will not make a June 5 repayment to the International Monetary Fund if there is no prospect of an aid-for-reforms deal with its international creditors soon, the spokesman for the ruling Syriza party’s lawmakers said on Wednesday.

The payment of 300 million euros ($335 million) is the first of four this month totaling 1.6 billion euros from a country that depends on foreign aid to stay afloat.

Greece owes a total of about 320 billion euros, of which about 65 percent to euro zone governments and the IMF, and about 8.7 percent to the European Central Bank.

On Tuesday, Greece’s creditors drafted the broad outlines of an agreement to put to the leftist government in Athens in a bid to conclude four months of negotiations and release aid before the country runs out of money.

“If there is no prospect of a deal by Friday or Monday, I don’t know by when exactly, we will not pay,” Nikos Filis told Mega TV.

In fact, there are reports that both the ECB and the Greek government are talking about Greece going to a “parallel domestic currency”

Biagio Bossone and Marco Cattaneo write that according to several recent media reports, both the Greek government and the ECB are taking into consideration the possibility (for Greece) to issue a parallel domestic currency to pay for government expenditures, including civil servant salaries, pensions, etc. This could happen in the coming weeks as Greece faces a severe shortage of euros. A new domestic currency would help make payments to public employees and pensioners while freeing up the euros needed to pay out creditors.

If Greece defaults and starts using another currency, the value of the euro is going to absolutely plummet and bond yields all over the continent are going to start heading into the stratosphere.

That is why it is so important to keep an eye on what is going on in Greece.

But no matter what happens in Greece, it appears that we are moving into a time when there will be higher interest rates around the world.  And since 505 trillion dollars in derivatives are directly tied to interest rate levels, that could lead to a financial unraveling unlike anything that we have ever seen before in the history of our planet.

As I have warned about so many times before, 2008 was just the warm up act.

The main event is still coming, and it is going to be extraordinarily painful.

This article was posted: Thursday, June 4, 2015 at 5:47 am

Prison Planet.com » Investors Start To Panic As A Global Bond Market Crash Begins

TiLTNews Network

The Freedom Act is WORSE than the Patriot Act

 

The Freedom Act is WORSE than the Patriot Act

Daniel McAdams
Lew Rockwell Blog
June 3, 2015

By a vote of 67-32 the Senate today passed the USA FREEDOM Act, just days after the expiration of key elements of the USA PATRIOT Act. The FREEDOM Act is billed as a reform of the unconstitutional and recently-ruled illegal bulk collection of Americans’ telecommunications, but in fact it is a whole new level of attack on civil liberties.

Here are just a couple of ways the FREEDOM Act is worse than the PATRIOT Act:

1) The recent decision of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that the bulk collection of American citizens’ telecommunications information was not authorized by the USA PATRIOT Act means that as of this afternoon, the bulk collection of American citizens’ telecommunications information was an illegal act. The government was breaking the law each time it grabbed our metadata. The moment the FREEDOM is signed by President Obama that same activity will become legal. How is making an unconstitutional and illegal act into a legal one a benefit to civil liberties?

2) The FREEDOM Act turns private telecommunications companies into agents of state security. They will be required to store our personal information and hand it over to state security organs upon demand. How do we know this development is a step in the wrong direction? It is reportedly the brainchild of Gen. Keith B. Alexander, the NSA director at the time! According to press reports, this was but a public relations move to deflect criticism of the bulk collection program. Alexander “saw the move as a way for Obama to respond to public criticism without losing programs the NSA deemed more essential,” reports Homeland Security News.

3) The FREEDOM Act turns private telecommunications companies into depositories of “pre-crime” data for future use of state security agencies. It is a classic authoritarian move for the state to co-opt and subsume the private sector. Once the FREEDOM Act is signed, Americans’ telecommunications information will be retained by the telecommunications companies for the use of state security agencies in potential future investigations. In other words, an individual under no suspicion of any crime and thus deserving full Fourth and Fifth Amendment protection will nevertheless find himself providing evidence against his future self should that person ever fall under suspicion. That is not jurisprudence in a free society.

4) The FREEDOM Act provides liability protection for the telecommunications firms who steal and store our private telecommunications information. In other words, there is not a thing you can do about the theft as long as the thief is a “private” agent of the state.

It is very telling that the same Congressional leaders who have supported the PATRIOT Act for all these years are now propagandizing Americans in favor of the FREEDOM Act.

FREEDOM Act becomes law; freedom, RIP.

This article was posted: Wednesday, June 3, 2015 at 5:36 am

Prison Planet.com » The Freedom Act is WORSE than the Patriot Act

TiLTNews Network

Prison Planet.com » BILDERBERG 2015 Elites Prepare For Nuclear And Economic Devastation

BILDERBERG 2015 Elites Prepare For Nuclear And Economic Devastation

Prison Planet.com

June 2, 2015

The Bilderberg group will coalesce June 9-14th in the Austrian Mountains at the Interalpen Hotel. How many of these instigators of widespread tyranny will be discussing their million dollar safe bunkers between meetings? As they plan to hide like moles while their hellish plans are unleashed on the gullible masses.

This article was posted: Tuesday, June 2, 2015 at 5:51 am

via Prison Planet.com » BILDERBERG 2015 Elites Prepare For Nuclear And Economic Devastation.

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9lCcQiIEVw]
TiLTNews Network

Rule By The Corporations

Paul Craig Roberts
Prison Planet.com
June 2, 2015

The Transatlantic and Transpacific Trade and Investment Partnerships have nothing to do with free trade. “Free trade” is used as a disguise to hide the power these agreements give to corporations to use law suits to overturn sovereign laws of nations that regulate pollution, food safety, GMOs, and minimum wages.

The first thing to understand is that these so-called “partnerships” are not laws written by Congress. The US Constitution gives Congress the authority to legislate, but these laws are being written without the participation of Congress. The laws are being written by corporations solely in the interest of their power and profit. The office of US Trade Representative was created in order to permit corporations to write law that serves only their interests. This fraud on the Constitution and the people is covered up by calling trade laws “treaties.”

Indeed, Congress is not even permitted to know what is in the laws and is limited to the ability to accept or refuse what is handed to Congress for a vote. Normally, Congress accepts, because “so much work has been done” and “free trade will benefit us all.”

The presstitutes have diverted attention from the content of the laws to “fast track.” When Congress votes “fast track,” it means Congress accepts that corporations can write the trade laws without the participation of Congress. Even criticisms of the “partnerships” are a smoke screen. Countries accused of slave labor could be excluded but won’t be. Super patriots complain that US sovereignty is violated by “foreign interests,” but US sovereignty is violated by US corporations. Others claim yet more US jobs will be offshored. In actual fact, the “partnerships” are unnecessary to advance the loss of American jobs as there is nothing that inhibits jobs offshoring now.

What the “partnerships” do is to make private corporations immune to the laws of sovereign countries on the grounds that laws of countries adversely impact corporate profits and constitute “restraint of trade.”

For example, under the Transatlantic Partnership, French laws against GMOs would be overturned as “restraints on trade” by law suits filed by Monsanto.

Countries that require testing of imported food, such as pork for trichnosis, and fumigation would be subject to lawsuits from corporations, because these regulations increase the cost of imports.

Countries that do not provide monopoly protection for brand name pharmaceuticals and chemical products, and allow generics in their place, can be sued for damages by corporations.

Obama himself has no input into the process. Here is what is going on: The Trade Representative is a corporate stooge. He serves the private corporations and will go on to a million dollar annual salary. The corporations have bribed the political leaders in every country to sign away their sovereignty and the general welfare of their people to private corporations. Corporations have paid US senators large sums for transferring Congress’ law-making powers to corporations.http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/may/27/corporations-paid-us-senators-fast-track-tpp When these “partnerships” pass, no country that signed will have any legislative authority to legislate or enforce any law that any corporation regards as inimical to its bottom line.

Yes, the great promiser of change is bringing change. He is turning Asia, Europe, and the US over to rule by the corporations.

Only those who have sold their integrity for money sign these agreements. Apparently Merkel, a Washington vassal, is one of them. http://sputniknews.com/politics/20150530/1022740004.html

According to news reports, both of France’s main political parties have sold out to the corporations, but not Marine Le Pen’s National Front Party. In the last EU elections, the dissident parties, such as Le Pen and Farage’s, prevailed over the traditional parties, but the dissidents are yet to prevail in their own countries.

Marine Le Pen objects to the secrecy of the agreements that establishes corporate rule. As Europe’s only leader, she speaks:

“It is vital that the French people know about TTIP’s content and its motivations in order to be able to fight it. Because our fellow countrymen must have the choice of their future, because they should impose a model for society that suits them, and not one forced by multinational companies eager for profits, Brussels technocrats bought by the lobbies, and politicians from the UMP [party of former president Nicolas Sarkozy] who are subservient to these technocrats.”

It is vital that the American public also know, but not even Congress is permitted to know.

How does it work, this “freedom and democracy” that we Americans allegedly have, when neither the people nor their elected representatives are permitted to participate in the making of laws that enable private corporations to negate the law-making functions of governments and place corporate profit above the general welfare?

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following. His latest book, The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West is now available.

This article was posted: Tuesday, June 2, 2015 at 6:01 am

TiLTNews Network