Monthly Archives: August 2007

ACLU joins fight over Ron Paul sign

Orlando Sentinel | Aug 31, 2007

by Robert Sargent

CLERMONT – The American Civil Liberties Union is supporting a Clermont resident in his spat with the city over a political campaign sign.

Bryan Orr, 24, put a sign in front of his home on West Minnehaha Drive this month touting Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul. But a Clermont official told Orr that he had to either pay a $50 refundable deposit or take down the sign — and violation would lead to a $250 citation.

Orr challenged the city’s code, calling it an infringement of his political free speech. So he contacted the media and the ACLU to gain awareness for his cause and some extra publicity for Paul.

It worked.

The ACLU Foundation of Florida sent a letter to Clermont on Thursday arguing that the city’s implementation of the code was unconstitutional. The civil-rights watchdog also threatened Clermont with a federal lawsuit if it tried to pursue enforcement against Orr.

Clermont’s attorney contacted the ACLU on Thursday and said the city would not enforce the rule on Orr, according to Glenn M. Katon, Central Region Office director for the ACLU Foundation of Florida. City Manager Wayne Saunders said he would meet with the attorney today.

“Our city attorney is looking at the way the ordinance is written,” Saunders said. “We are going to make sure that we are confident in the way the ordinance is written before it is enforced.”

Many cities have rules regulating political campaign signs. Nearby Groveland also charges a refundable deposit for signs. Other cities, including Mount Dora, have never required deposits, although they do mandate a certain size for signs and that properties have only one sign per political candidate.

Orr said he wants Clermont to recognize how its law is affecting him.

“What I am trying to accomplish is to make them think about it — make them consider whether this is a freedom-of-speech issue,” he explained.

Orr said he put the sign out earlier this month reading “Ron Paul President ’08.” A few days later, a Clermont code-enforcement officer picked up the sign and brought it to his front door with a message about the city’s code.

Orr then placed two signs in his yard. The city responded with a letter asking him to take down the signs. Orr said he talked with city officials and e-mailed them about the issue.

He complied with Clermont’s request, although he said he put a sign in his yard again Thursday after the ACLU sent its letter.

Clermont officials have used the $50 deposit as a way to make political candidates clean up signs after an election. The code targets candidates and their supporters to pay the fees — not residents who post the candidates’ signs:

“The candidate whose sign is erected or placed on any premises shall deposit with the city clerk, or cause to be deposited by a designee thereof, a fee as adopted by resolution of the city council and on file in the city clerk’s office, which sum shall be used to fund the cost of removal and disposition of such signs by city employees if the signs are not removed within the time limit set out in this section. A single deposit shall be required for each candidate or political cause being advertised.”

The ACLU argues that the rule does not apply to Orr, an air-conditioning contractor with a wife and four children. Officials also said prohibiting residents from posting political signs unless candidates named on those signs pay the required deposit violates free speech protected under the First Amendment.

Katon criticized governments that have different restrictions for political signs from any other type of sign.

“That really raises the hackles for us when it becomes easier to put up a ‘For Sale’ sign than something related to political speech,” he said.

End Fluoridation, Say 500 Physicians, Dentists, Scientists And Environmentalists


Fluoride Action Network | Aug 10, 2007

In a statement released recently, over 600 professionals are urging Congress to stop water fluoridation until Congressional hearings are conducted. They cite new scientific evidence that fluoridation, long promoted to fight tooth decay, is ineffective and has serious health risks.

Signers include a Nobel Prize winner, three members of the prestigious 2006 National Research Council (NRC) panel that reported on fluoride’s toxicology, two officers in the Union representing professionals at EPA headquarters, the President of the International Society of Doctors for the Environment, and hundreds of medical, dental, academic, scientific and environmental professionals, worldwide.

Signer Dr. Arvid Carlsson, winner of the 2000 Nobel Prize for Medicine, says, “Fluoridation is against all principles of modern pharmacology. It’s really obsolete.”

Paul Connett, PhD, Executive Director of the Fluoride Action Network (FAN), announced that an Online Action Petition to Congress in support of the Professionals’ Statement will soon be available at FAN’s web site,

“The NRC report dramatically changed scientific understanding of fluoride’s health risks,” says Connett. “Government officials who continue to promote fluoridation must testify under oath as to why they are ignoring the powerful evidence of harm in the NRC report,” he added.

An Assistant NY State Attorney General calls the report “the most up-to-date expert authority on the health effects of fluoride exposure.”

The Professionals’ Statement also references:

— The new American Dental Association policy recommending infant formula NOT be prepared with fluoridated water.

— The CDC’s concession that the predominant benefit of fluoride is topical not systemic.

— CDC data showing that dental fluorosis, caused by fluoride over-exposure, now impacts one third of American children.

— Major research indicating little difference in decay rates between fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities.

— A Harvard study indicating a possible link between fluoridation and bone cancer.

— The silicofluoride chemicals used for fluoridation are contaminated industrial waste and have never been FDA- approved for human ingestion.

The Environmental Working Group (EWG), a DC watchdog, revealed that a Harvard professor concealed the fluoridation/bone cancer connection for three years. EWG President Ken Cook states, “It is time for the US to recognize that fluoridation has serious risks that far outweigh any minor benefits, and unlike many other environmental issues, it’s as easy to end as turning off a valve at the water plant.”

. . .



Fluoride Action Network

Majority Of Scientists Don’t Support Man Made Warming Theory

Survey of peer reviewed studies reveals less than 50% of published scientists believe global warming is man made. More skeptics than advocates among scientific community while IPCC claim majority endorse the theory. | Aug 30, 2007

by Steve Watson

A new survey of over 500 peer reviewed scientific research papers on climate change, written between 2004 and 2007, has concluded that less than half endorse what has been dubbed the “consensus view,” that human activity is contributing to considerable global climate change.

In direct conflict with assertions by the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that a scientific consensus agrees it is 90% likely that man is responsible for warming, Medical researcher Dr. Klaus-Martin Schulte’s survey contends that only 45% support the theory and that is only if you include papers that merely lean towards endorsement.

Though the survey has not yet been released, the results have been submitted to the journal Energy and Environment, and science blog DailyTech has obtained a pre-publication copy which states:

Of 528 total papers on climate change, only 38 (7%) gave an explicit endorsement of the consensus. If one considers “implicit” endorsement (accepting the consensus without explicit statement), the figure rises to 45%. However, while only 32 papers (6%) reject the consensus outright, the largest category (48%) are neutral papers, refusing to either accept or reject the hypothesis. This is no “consensus.”

The figures are even more shocking when one remembers the watered-down definition of consensus here. Not only does it not require supporting that man is the “primary” cause of warming, but it doesn’t require any belief or support for “catastrophic” global warming. In fact of all papers published in this period (2004 to February 2007), only a single one makes any reference to climate change leading to catastrophic results.

Man made warming proponents have often pointed to a similar survey that was conducted by history professor Naomi Oreskes on peer-reviewed papers published on the ISI Web of Science database from 1993 to 2003 which found that a majority of scientists supported the theory.

Dr. Klaus-Martin Schulte sought to update the research and according to DailyTech, used the same database and search terms as Oreskes but reached a radically different conclusion.

The introduction and the summary of the IPCC’s report was written entirely by politicians under the mandate of the UN, the input of actual scientists was minimal. In addition, all sections that were written by selected scientists were edited to comply with the report summary.

Some of the scientists involved even admitted that the IPCC models failed to accurately predict climate change and that “none of the climate states in the models corresponds even remotely to the current observed climate”.

By contrast, the ISI Web of Science database covers 8,700 journals and publications, including every leading scientific journal in the world and is not directly influenced by any governmental body.

Schulte’s survey confirms the claim that the climate change momentum has shifted among prominent scientists who are now benefiting from a greater depth of research. A spate of new research papers has significantly chilled fears of global warming.

The new survey provides undeniable proof that the world is being sold a lie on climate change by a group of politicians and elite lobbyists who wish to seize on the opportunity to hype the global warming threat and use it as a means of social manipulation for political and corporate gain.

As we have extensively reported, it is the elites, the establishment and big business interests that are pushing these fears, not the scientific community.

People who still trust the platitudes of politicians and elitists who implore us to change our way of life, cough up more tax money, and get on board with the global warming religion save being linked with Holocaust denial, are as deluded and enslaved as the tribes of Mesoamerica who, unaware of the natural phenomenon of a solar eclipse, thought their high priests could make the sky snake eat the Sun, and therefore obeyed their every demand.

Politicians are professional liars, they make careers out of deceiving people and twisting reality to fit pre-conceived agendas, yet a cascade of otherwise rationally minded people are eager to blindly trust everything they have to say about climate change, no matter how delusional it sounds.

They are also willing to comply with the ridiculous overbearing “solutions” to climate change that will just coincidentally restrict mobility and freedom of travel, regulate personal behavior, empower and expand global government and reinvigorate the surveillance state – everything Big Brother ever wanted – but surely they wouldn’t lie to us about global warming to achieve it, would they?

For a wealth of information on the man made global warming hoax check our archive which has scores of articles and multimedia files relating to the science of global warming as well as the agenda behind the hype.

. . .


Global Warming Doomsday Called Off


Globalists Love Global Warming
Trilateral Commission, chairman of British Petroleum, CFR, Club of Rome fan hysteria to achieve world government
In his excellent article, Global warming hysteria serves as excuse for world government, Daniel Taylor outlines how the exploitation of the natural phenomenon of “global warming” was a pet project of the Club of Rome and the CFR. “In a report titled “The First Global Revolution” (1991) published by the Club of Rome, a globalist think tank, we find the following statement: “In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill…The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.”

The First Global Revolution: A Report by the Council of Rome
“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill…The real enemy, then, is humanity itself….Bring the divided nation together to face an outside enemy, either a real one or else one invented for the purpose…”

Al Gore’s Global Green Fascism
In a New York Times editorial, Al Gore says we need a new generational mission to combat global warming. What he really wants is government control of the economy.

Globalist politics of global fascism……

“It would seem that men and women need a common motivation, namely a common adversary, to organize and act together in the vacuum such as motivation seemed to have ceased to exist or have yet to be found. The need for enemies seems to be a common historical factor…

Bring the divided nation together to face an outside enemy, either a real one or else one invented for the purpose

Democracy will be made to seem responsible for the lagging economy, the scarcity and uncertainties. The very concept of democracy could then be brought into question and allow for the seizure of power by extremists of one brand or the other…

In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. The real enemy [of the elites and their minions] then is humanity itself.”

– “The First Global Revolution” (1991) published by the Club of Rome. Members of the Club of Rome include: Al Gore, Jimmy Carter, Bill Gates, George Soros and author of the Kyoto Protocols Maurice Strong.

. . .

MORE References:

More Than Half of Analyzed Weather Stations Don’t Meet Federal Guidelines
The preliminary results show Watts and his volunteers have surveyed about a quarter of the 1,221 stations making up the U.S. Historical Climatology Network. Of those, more than half appear to fall short of federal guidelines for optimum placement. Some examples include weather stations placed near sewage treatment plants, parking lots, and near cars, buildings and air-conditioners – all artificial heat sources which could affect temperature records.

Key: “during times of quiet sunspot activity” as have now, and which is falsely used as the “reason that the sun can’t be causing warming.”

NASA Study Finds Increasing Solar Trend That Can Change Climate
Since the late 1970s, the amount of solar radiation the sun emits, during times of quiet sunspot activity, has increased by nearly .05 percent per decade, according to a NASA funded study.

The Science of Global Warming in Perspective
The cause of global warming is oceans heating, not greenhouse gases, as always occurs at the beginning of ice ages. When an ice age begins, global Warming occurs exactly as it is doing now. Heated oceans cause precipitation to increase. Eventually, increased snowfall will reflect away solar energy and trigger a cool-down.

Stop driving SUVs. It will save the Martian Ice Caps! Right….

Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming, Scientist Says
Simultaneous warming on Earth and Mars suggests that our planet’s recent climate changes have a natural—and not a human-induced—cause, according to one scientist’s controversial theory. In 2005 data from NASA’s Mars Global Surveyor and Odyssey missions revealed that the carbon dioxide “ice caps” near Mars’s south pole had been diminishing for three summers in a row.

The truth about global warming – it’s the Sun that’s to blame
Global warming has finally been explained: the Earth is getting hotter because the Sun is burning more brightly than at any time during the past 1,000 years, according to new research. A study by Swiss and German scientists suggests that increasing radiation from the sun is responsible for recent global climate changes. This just shows, that even if CO2 was the cause of the current warming trend (which it isn’t), the premise that warming will keep spiraling out of control is totally unsubstantiated

Even if CO2 WAS causing warming (which it isn’t), the projections for disastrous warming spiraling out of control are totally false.

The 60-Second Climate Skeptic
A Layman’s Guide to Anthropogenic (Man-Made) Global Warming
Using simple math, we see that if temperatures have risen 0.5C due to 36% of a doubling, we might expect them to rise by 1.39C for a full doubling to 0.056% of the atmosphere. But this assumes that the rise is linear — but we already said (and no one denies) that it is in fact a diminishing return relationship. Using a truer form of the curve, a 0.5C historic rise for 36% of a doubling implies a full doubling would raise temperatures by about 1C, or about 0.5C more than we have seen to date. Based on empirical evidence, we would then expect a rise of CO2 concentrations to 0.056% (a level we might expect between the years 2070 and 2100) to increase world temperatures another 0.5C. This means that the magnitude of global warming in the next century might be about what we have seen (and apparently survived) since 1940.

Global Government: the top agenda of the elite

Global warming hysteria serves as excuse for world government
If world government is to be achieved by consent, the world must be sold on the idea of world government and its necessity

Depopulation: another top agenda of the elite. Global Government and Depopulation go hand in hand.

This reveals the sick globalist’s eugenics agenda using doomsday hysteria to convince us that we need to be culled, by any means necessary. Of course, he isn’t volunteering to go first.

Top Scientist Advocates Mass Culling 90% Of Human Population
A top scientist gave a speech to the Texas Academy of Science last month in which he advocated the need to exterminate 90% of the population through the airborne ebola virus. Dr. Eric R. Pianka’s chilling comments, and their enthusiastic reception again underscore the elite’s agenda to enact horrifying measures of population control.

More depopulation eugenics of Global Warming

Global Warming Fanatics Warming Up to Evangelicals
The producer of a movie on global warming that is being shown in Evangelical churches has admitted she believes earth’s true problem is too many people.

Does anyone still need further proof that anthropogenic Global Warming is a globalist scam to scare us into global government, deindustrialization and depopulation?

. . .


Complications Arise From HPV Vaccine

As of May 31, 2007, there have been 13 cases of Guillain Barré syndrome (GBS) in association with the HPV vaccine (Gardasil) reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). Guillain-Barre syndrome is a serious disorder that occurs when the body’s defense (immune) system mistakenly attacks part of the nervous system. This leads to nerve inflammation which continues to get worse.

Newsmax | Aug 29, 2007

By Michael A. Glueck and Robert J. Cihak

Back in the days of our training at the heavenly hallowed and not-so-humble halls of the Harvard teaching hospitals in Boston, there was a well-known axiom. To paraphrase, “Be neither the first to adopt the new or the last to throw the old aside.”

Sometimes the Solomon-like wisdom of longevity pays a dividend. The story of the human papillomavirus vaccine is one of them.

In an article in, February 2007, it was concluded that until more testing and studies are performed and the public has more knowledge of the safety and efficacy of the HPV vaccine, there is no need to rush to vaccination — and certainly not mandatory premature inoculation.

At that time it was also noted that “proof of safety is lacking.” The vaccine is claimed to be safe and “well-tolerated,” but studies have involved only a few thousand women, most over 16 years of age, for less than five years. In one study, “arthritic symptoms” occurred three times as often in subjects who got the vaccine, compared to subjects who only got the control vaccine. An increased risk of juvenile rheumatoid arthritis, “a deforming, devastating, lifelong disease, is being watched for.”

A recent August 27, 2007, Association of American Physicians and Surgeons News Release AAPS reports additional adverse effects from the HPV vaccine.

As of May 31, 2007, there have been 13 cases of Guillain Barré syndrome (GBS) in association with the HPV vaccine (Gardasil) reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

Guillain-Barre syndrome is a serious disorder that occurs when the body’s defense (immune) system mistakenly attacks part of the nervous system. This leads to nerve inflammation which continues to get worse.

The inflammation usually affects the nerve’s covering (myelin sheath). Demyelination slows nerve signaling. Damage to other parts of the nerve can cause the nerve to stop working.This nerve damage causes tingling, muscle weakness, and paralysis.

Guillain-Barre syndrome is considered an autoimmune disorder. The exact cause of Guillain-Barre syndrome is unknown. The syndrome may occur at any age, but is most common in people of both sexes between the ages 30 and 50.

It often follows a minor infection, usually a respiratory (lung) infection or gastrointestinal (gut) infection.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) notes that six of the patients had received Gardasil alone, and six had also received meningococcal vaccine (Menactra). Since the end of May, an additional two cases have been reported.

The CDC states that studies are planned concerning the concomitant administration of Gardasil and Menactra. So far, the combination of Gardasil and hepatitis B vaccine is the only one that has been studied, although one or more other vaccines are frequently given to Gardasil recipients.

An analysis of VAERS data by the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) concludes that the risk of serious adverse reactions such as GBS is increased by concomitant administration of other vaccines. In patients who made a report to VAERS, the risk of GBS is more than 10 times greater for Gardasil given with Menactra compared to Gardasil given alone (P<.0001). A causal relationship with vaccine administration has not been proved. The background incidence of GBS in persons in the second decade of life is 1-2/100,000.

According to an NVIC press release, one of the patients who reported a reaction to VAERS was an 18-year-old athlete who ran six miles that day before receiving Gardasil, Menactra, and Varivax on the same day. She was hospitalized for 22 days with weakness of all limbs but did not require a ventilator. Now receiving physical therapy, she hopes at least to be able to play the guitar, draw, and smile again.

The second most commonly reported adverse event is syncope, with 239 reports. Sometimes this has resulted in serious injury, including fractures and subdural hematomas. It is suggested that vaccines be administered with the patient supine and be followed with at least 10 minutes of observation.

Syncope has, however, occurred after a longer delay.

Gardasil is now involved in 15­20 percent of all VAERS reports that are filed.

In May, Lawrence Gostin, J.D., of the Georgetown Law Center and Catherine DeAngelis, M.D., M.P.H., editor in chief of JAMA, wrote of “important concerns about mandatory HPV vaccination” that are “not moral,” including cost, parental concerns about safety, and potential compensation for injury. They advocated taking a “deliberative approach” rather than mandating the vaccine for school entry at the present time.

“Legislation to make HPV vaccine mandatory has undermined public confidence and created a backlash among parents,” they write. “There is nothing more important to the success of public health policies than to ensure community acceptability. In the absence of an immediate risk of serous harm, it is preferable to adopt voluntary measures, making state compulsion a last resort” (Gostin LO, DeAngelis CD. Mandatory HPV vaccination: public health vs private wealth. JAMA 2007;297:1921-1923).

So we repeat the original conclusion of the February 2007 column that until more testing and studies are performed and the public has more knowledge of the safety and efficacy of the HPV vaccine, there is no need to rush to vaccination — and certainly not mandatory premature inoculation.

Doctors pooh-pooh complaints about adverse drug side-effects


Reuters | Aug 28, 2007

By Anne Harding

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) – When patients feel they might be having an adverse drug effect, doctors will very often dismiss their concerns, a new study shows.

In a survey of 650 patients, taking cholesterol-lowering drugs called statins, who reported having adverse drug reactions, many said their physicians denied that the drug could be connected to their symptoms, Dr. Beatrice A. Golomb of the University of California at San Diego and her colleagues found.

“Physicians seem to commonly dismiss the possibility of a connection,” Golomb told Reuters Health. “This seems to occur even for the best-supported adverse effects of the most widely prescribed class of drugs…Clearly there is a need for better physician education about adverse effects, and there is a strong need for patient involvement in adverse event reporting.”

The best-known side effects of statins, which include widely prescribed drugs such as Lipitor and Zocor, are liver damage and muscle problems, although statins have also been tied to changes in memory, concentration and mood, among other problems.

Physician reaction to a potential side effect is crucial because the muscle problems can progress to a rare but potentially fatal condition called rhabdomyolysis if the drug isn’t discontinued.

The researchers investigated the response of doctors to statin patients who believed they were having adverse drug reactions. In the great majority of cases, the patient, not the doctor, initiated the discussion.

Forty-seven percent of patients with muscle problems or cognitive problems said their doctors dismissed the possibility that their symptoms were statin-related, while 51 percent of patients with peripheral neuropathy, a type of nerve pain affecting the extremities, said their doctors denied a possible connection with statins.

Overall, 32 percent of patients reported that their doctors told them there was no link between their symptoms and statin use, 39 percent said their physicians said such a connection was possible, and 29 percent said their doctors “neither endorsed nor dismissed the possibility of symptom link to statins.”

The investigators were “surprised” at how frequently patients reported that their doctors dismissed their concerns, Golomb said. While her study wasn’t designed to find out why, the researcher notes that while the pharmaceutical industry is sure to get the word out about a drug’s benefits, there is “really no corresponding interest group to make sure that physicians learn about adverse effects.”

Patients should be aware of the potential adverse effects of any medication they’re taking, she said. And those who find their doctors dismiss their concerns should probably look elsewhere for medical care, she added. “In general patients should always have physicians that they feel are hearing them.”

. . .


Doctors May Be Third Leading Cause of Death

Statistics prove prescription drugs are 16,400% more deadly than terrorists

Modern Health Care System is the Leading Cause of Death, Part I

Medical system is leading cause of death and injury in US

7/7 survivors launch legal challenge to force independent inquiry

Daily Mail | Aug 31, 2007

Survivors and relatives of the 52 commuters killed in the 7/7 London bombings of 2005, have begun legal action to force the government to hold an independent inquiry into the attacks.

The group argues official accounts of the suicide bombings on London’s transport system carried out by four young British Islamists have been insufficient, inaccurate and misleading.

The 7/7 inquiry group, made up of bereaved relatives and those who escaped the bombings, says the refusal to hold a public inquiry breaches the European Convention on Human Rights and intends to seek a judicial review of that decision.

Lawyers for the group said the papers were being served at the High Court on Thursday.

“Firstly we say that the decision of the former Home Secretary not to order an inquiry was irrational,” lawyer Cliff Tibber said.

“Secondly there is a positive duty under article 2 of the Human Rights Act in these circumstances to order an inquiry.” The first hearing at the High Court is unlikely to take place until October.

The government has rejected demands for an independent review of the bombings, which opposition politicians have also called for.

It says an inquiry would distract stretched security services when Britain is at serious risk of attack.

“As we have consistently maintained, experience has shown that a fuller public inquiry can take years and divert huge resources,” a Home Office spokeswoman said earlier this month.

Britain remains at its second highest threat level, “severe”, meaning an attack is highly likely. In June, a jeep laden with petrol canisters was rammed into Glasgow Airport, just days after two cars packed with gas canisters, petrol and nails were found in London.

The 7/7 inquiry group says there are vital unanswered questions that need to be addressed, particularly how much the authorities knew about two of the bombers, ringleader Mohammad Sidique Khan and Shehzad Tanweer, before the attacks.

They were photographed, recorded and followed by intelligence operatives several times in early 2004 in the company of plotters who have since been jailed for planning attacks using fertiliser-based bombs.

The government said in the aftermath of the July 7 strikes that all the bombers were “clean skins” who had not previously crossed the authorities’ radar.

The group says that means an inquiry is needed to determine whether the government had failed in its duty to protect life.

“We would very much like answers to the questions we have raised. We don’t understand why we haven’t received them,” Jacqui Putnam, who was on board the train blown up by Khan, said.

9/11 Truth Events in New York to Be Biggest in History


Supporting first responders, honoring the fallen and demanding truth & justice with thousands of activists, celebrities and music artists massed at Ground Zero making a powerful statement for truth | Aug 29, 2007

Truth activities in New York surrounding the sixth anniversary of 9/11 may prove to be a pivotal point in the fight for truth and justice and the restoration of the republic in the United States as the entire world spirals towards global conflict and tyranny. have put together five days of truth action and events that will send shockwaves to the damaged and incredible official story.

Momentum gained over the past year has helped spread the message of 9/11 truth to hundreds of millions worldwide and this anniversary action will stand as the largest ever against the lies, deception and treachery put forward by the military-industrial complex, the controlled-corporate media and other elements of the criminal elite.

9/11 truthers will assemble to stop the exploitation of the victims, whose names have been used by the elite to fuel an agenda of world domination and control. Activists will also demand a new investigation– which a majority of victims’ families want– and help to support first responders who are sick and dying from toxic dust.

Many of the celebrities and other high profile people who have stood up for 9/11 truth have tentative plans to participate in the events alongside thousands of activists, including actors Christine Ebersole and Daniel Sunjata, as well as a wide-range of music artists (see below).

Five days of activities from September 7th through September 11th will include street actions at the CFR, the New York Stock Exchange, the Federal Reserve, Rockefeller Center, Times Square and the World Trade Center.

Loose Change: Final Cut and Alex Jones’ Endgame will both premiere during the event and a fundraiser will be held to support the tens of thousands of sick and dying first responders suffering from toxic dust.

These events will all lead up to a silent vigil at Ground Zero on 9/11/07 where the fallen will be honored and their memories defended.

The series of events will also feature a concert on Monday, September 10th with a line-up of numerous artists from a variety of genres.

The culmination of these activities will create a dynamic presence that won’t be easily ignored and will never be forgotten. The rejection of the 9/11 official story will be clear and very visible as political leaders and mainstream media come to stage another theater event to gain from the attacks– but this time, their lies and deceit will not stand.

British Membership in EU Costing $230,000 per minute

Being in Europe ‘costs £114,000 a minute’

This year, the report says, membership of the EU will cost £60.1 billion

Daily Mail | Aug 30, 2007

Britain is paying £114,000 a minute to be a member of the EU, it is claimed today.

That is £1,000 a year for every man, woman and child in the country.

The report, by the right-wing Bruges Group think-tank, is an attempt to conduct the cost-benefit analysis demanded by many MPs and peers since we joined the then European Economic Community in 1973.

Successive governments have refused such a study, arguing the benefits are selfevident. But the research concludes Britain has contributed £213billion to the EU budget since it joined – and forecasts that by 2013 this will have risen to almost £300billion.

It also assesses indirect costs of membership. Over-regulation costs Britain at least £26billion a year and the Common Agricultural Policy at least £15.6billion, it claims.

This year, the report says, membership of the EU will cost £60.1 billion gross.

The CAP, the report says, costs a British family of four an additional £20 on their weekly food bill.

About half of this is made up of higher taxes in order to subsidise farmers, and half through higher food bills compared to what we would pay for the same food on the world market.

Robert Oulds, director of the Bruges Group, said: £To put it into perspective just £1 billion will pay for 222,000 hip replacements, or 46,893 nurses, or 38,782 teachers, or 34,585 police officers.

“This money would be better spent in Britain for the benefit of the British people.”

The Treasury dismissed the figures, saying Britain’s contributions for 2006/7 were £8.7billion gross. The European Commission said the statistics were “exaggerated”.

City Requires $50 To Put Ron Paul Sign In Front Yard

WFTV | Aug 28, 2007

CLERMONT, Fla. — The city of Clermont has decided to enforce an old code aimed at keeping medians and yards clear of clutter during the election season, but one man says that law is simply un-American.

Ron Paul – Supporter Forced To Remove Campaign Sign

The presidential election is still over a year away, but one Clermont resident is getting a jump on the competition, already putting signs in his yard supporting his candidate of choice, but that support is coming at a cost.

Bryan Orr was the first to find out that the city of Clermont has recently started enforcing an old code concerning political signage.

“You can’t regulate political free speech,” Orr said.

That code, which applies only to political signs and not other signs, has been on the books since 1980. Orr’s beef is simple.

“You can’t say political content has to be regulated, but other types of content aren’t regulated,” he said.

City hall isn’t necessarily being prohibitive, just restrictive. What you have to do is fill out a form and pay $50 as a deposit. As soon as the political season is over, you remove your political sign and go to city hall to get your $50 back.

One local attorney said it may be legal, but it just sounds so un-American.

“Even a non-politically motivated law by the city, if it has the effect of chilling our political speech, it’s unconstitutional,” said attorney J.J. Dahl.

Orr is picking his battle. Rather than pay a $250, he’s removed the signs for now, but said the fight is far from over.

“My free speech is being squelched. And because of that, we are moving forward and I’m going to do everything in my power and then the signs will go right back up,” Orr said.

Eyewitness News tried to talk to city administrators, but they refused to go on camera, saying simply that the rule has been on the books for a long time.

Only ten minutes on a mobile could trigger cancer, scientists believe

Daily Mail | Aug 29, 2007


Mobile phones can take as little as ten minutes to trigger changes in the brain associated with cancer, scientists claimed yesterday.

They found even low levels of radiation from handsets interfere with the way brain cells divide. Cell division encourages the growth of tumours.

cell-phone-damageAlthough the researchers did not come up with evidence that mobile phone signals are harmful, the findings suggest they could be.

Several major studies have also found no link between mobile use and brain tumours, nor a dramatic rise in cancer rates.

But campaigners insist the discovery undermines official advice that the devices are safe.

The guidance is based on the assumption that the phones emit too little radiation to heat the brain dangerously.

However, the new study by the Weizmann Institute of Science in Israel suggests “nonthermal” radiation could pose a risk.

The Israeli scientists exposed human and rat cells in a laboratory to low-level radiation at 875 megahertz – a similar frequency to the one used in many mobile phones.

Although the radiation was far weaker than emissions from a typical handset, it began to switch on a chemical signal inside the cells within ten minutes, the researchers report in the Biochemical Journal.

The chemical signals they detected were involved in the division of cells.

The researchers say the reaction was not caused by heating and claim they have found a separate way in which mobile phones could damage health.

Dr Rony Seger, a co-author of the study, told the magazine New Scientist: “The significance lies in showing cells do react to cellphone radiation in a non-thermal way.”

Although changes in the chemical pathway seen by the Israeli scientists have been linked to several cancers, the researchers say there was no sign of a cancer-causing effect.

Dr Simon Arthur, a health expert at Dundee University, said the effect was ‘unlikely to cause cancer’.

Dr Dariusz Leszczynski, of the Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority in Helsinki, said: “If cell-phone radiation cannot induce biological effects then there will never be any health effects.

“On the other hand if we can show this radiation is able to induce biological effects then we have a different story.”

A major review of mobile phone safety is due to be published by the Health Protection Agency next month.

The agency’s last major report, in 2004, found no evidence mobiles were a serious health risk. It did, however, caution against excessive use, especially by the young.

Dr Michael Clark, a spokesman for the agency, said: “Because of findings like this that pop up from time to time, a precautionary approach is justified.”

Graham Philips, of campaign group Powerwatch, said: “Safety guidelines assume health effects from mobiles can only occur when significant heating of body tissue occurs.

“This study shows biological changes in response to low-level mobile phone radiation – something that could potentially have implications for health.

“Further research is required, however guidance based purely on thermal effects is clearly out of date.”