Canada Psychiatrist Concerned About Remote Influencing Weaponry Affecting Mental And Physical Health
by International Center Against Abuse of Covert Technologies
Amin Muhammad Gadit is a Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at Memorial University of Newfoundland, Faculty of Medicine. October 2009, he writes a paper with the title “Terrorism and Mental Health: The issue of Psychological Fragility” published in Journal of Pakistan Medical Association. In the paper he talks about psychological long term effects that result from terrorist activities on civilians, including behavioral problems and post-traumatic stress.
He also notes that with the introduction of remote influencing technology, and the new weapon systems, it might be challenging for a psychiatrist to tell the difference between real mental and physical problems and induced ones, asking one crucial question: Are we prepared for this challenge?
VIDEO — Oregon Standoff: Details Emerge of a Highly Dangerous, Multifaceted Psyop
by DAHBOO777
Jan 5, 2016
Greenpeace founder delivers powerful annual lecture, praises carbon dioxide – full text
via Watts Up With That?
by Anthony Watts
Oct 15, 2015
Full text of the speech: Dr. Patrick Moore: Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?
2015 Annual GWPF Lecture
Institute of Mechanical Engineers, London 14 October 2015
My Lords and Ladies, Ladies and Gentlemen.
Thank you for the opportunity to set out my views on climate change. As I have stated publicly on many occasions, there is no definitive scientific proof, through real-world observation, that carbon dioxide is responsible for any of the slight warming of the global climate that has occurred during the past 300 years, since the peak of the Little Ice Age. If there were such a proof through testing and replication it would have been written down for all to see.
The contention that human emissions are now the dominant influence on climate is simply a hypothesis, rather than a universally accepted scientific theory. It is therefore correct, indeed verging on compulsory in the scientific tradition, to be skeptical of those who express certainty that “the science is settled” and “the debate is over”.
But there is certainty beyond any doubt that CO2 is the building block for all life on Earth and that without its presence in the global atmosphere at a sufficient concentration this would be a dead planet. Yet today our children and our publics are taught that CO2 is a toxic pollutant that will destroy life and bring civilization to its knees. Tonight I hope to turn this dangerous human-caused propaganda on its head. Tonight I will demonstrate that human emissions of CO2 have already saved life on our planet from a very untimely end. That in the absence of our emitting some of the carbon back into the atmosphere from whence it came in the first place, most or perhaps all life on Earth would begin to die less than two million years from today.
[…CONTINUE READING THIS SPEECH]
[hat tip: Jan Irvin]
[related:
- BREAKING: Greenpeace co-founder reports Greenpeace to the FBI under RICO and wire-fraud statutes
- VIDEO/PODCAST — Abiogenic Petroleum: Peak Oil and “Fossil Fuels” – Debunked w/ Greg Quinones #241
- If carbon dioxide is so bad for the planet, why do greenhouse growers buy CO2 generators to double plant growth?]
Wahhabis and Salafis are not Sunnis
via Conspiracy School
by David Livingstone
08/02/2015
Ijtihad
There have been numerous sects that have splintered from the main body of Islam, and all have clearly defined themselves as separate traditions. None have been so clever and wily, and so successfully imposed their pernicious influence, as the Wahhabis and Salafis, who have insinuated themselves instead as a “reform” movement within Sunni Islam. Instead, they have characterized Sunni Islam as being founded on belief in the rightful successorship of the four righteous Caliphs, in contradistinction to Saudi Arabia’s traditional enemies, the Shiah of Iran.
Rather, the Wahhabis and Salafis represent a consequence of a wave of “revivalist” movements that began to emerge in the eighteenth century, sponsored by the British, with the aim of undermining Sunni Islam, which has historically been founded on following one of the four schools of legal interpretation, known as Madhhabs, a practice known as Taqlid.
Known for their nefarious strategy of Divide and Conquer, the British were intent on re-writing the laws of Islam to suit their purposes. However, Sunni Islam had formalized a highly sophisticated legal tradition that was effectively impervious to outside influence. According to Joseph Schacht, the renowned historian of Islamic Law:
Islamic law provides us with a remarkable example of the possibilities of legal thought and of human thought in general, and with a key to understanding the essence of one of the great world religions.[1]
Within the first few centuries of its existence, these Madhhabs had settled the majority of the early legal questions in Islam, and strictly forbade the use of unqualified independent reasoning, known as Ijtihad, in order to protect the sanctity of Islam from violation. However, what all the British-sponsored “revivalists” held in common was a rejection of the Madhhab tradition, in favour of re-opening the Doors of Itjihad, which has resulted in the wholesale rewriting Islam, in order to lend false justification to the injustices they currently perpetrate under its name.
Initially, the followers of Mohammed, known as the Sahabah, would seek advice from those amongst themselves who had attained reputations for piety and advanced knowledge of the religion. However, as the Muslim empire expanded, the cases that required rulings became increasingly complex, and because they were not necessarily explicitly addressed in the Quran, it became necessary for judges (Qadis) to make use of their independent reasoning (Ijtihad). The word “Ijtihad” is derived from the same root as the word “Jihad,” and means to strive with one’s utmost effort.
NYC Plans to Turn 7,500 Payphones Into WiFi Hot Spots Despite Health and Privacy Risks
via Activist Post
by Kevin Samson
Jan 3, 2016
Awareness continues to increase surrounding the health dangers of Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs) emanating from our daily gadgets, as well as from the rise of the Smart Grid. For example, a prominent neuroscientist went on record in a lecture to the medical community itself where he exposed the many health risks as well as an industry-wide attempt by telecom to cover up the negative consequences. A world-renown biochemist is seeking to abolish WiFi in schools. And a British ER physician has made it her mission to educate people about what steps they can take to minimize exposure and damage to WiFi. A slew of peer-review scientific studies support the warnings of these experts.
So what happens when your entire city becomes one giant WiFi signal? Major cities have been planning to do just that, and their plans are now ready to become reality.
Telecom giant Virgin Media announced a pilot program in October to implement “discreet street furniture” and the “UK’s first Smart Pavement” in Chesham, a city of 21,000 people. They stated that their plans were ultimately far more ambitious, seeking “to build more networks like this across the UK.”
But when New York City signs on to pervasive WiFi, we really should pay attention.
The city already has erected one 9-foot-tall structure that is an indication of the rollout of 7,500 WiFi hot spots, which are slated to go online early in 2016. It is part of the LinkNYC program (“Faster Than a New York Minute,” har har) which proclaims to become “the fastest and largest municipal WiFi network in the world.”
[…CONTINUE READING THIS ARTICLE]
Jackals and Giraffes: The Weapon of Non-Violent Communication
via Renegade Tribune
by James Bronson
Aug 16, 2015
The terms ‘violence’ and ‘non-violence’ exist as almost an artificial dichotomy that can be manipulated by playing one against the other. We’ve been conditioned to view both functions (linguistically) as separate and at this stage of American discourse, not equal. Since these are the ‘rules of the game’ (because in all honesty, it’s a well-blended, non-dialectic set of techniques that truly works and ultimately can’t be planned for), we’ll still use these two popular terms for discussion to make things simple.
Violence is defined as ‘aggressive physical action’ or force used to cause physical damage or injury.
Non-violence (which is incorrectly described by Wikipedia as a ‘Sanskrit’ word) is a form of perceivable ‘non-action’ (considered ‘harmless’) or mental manipulation that plays on the feelings and sympathies of others, in order to affect changes in line with the non-violent actor’s agenda.
Modern non-violent philosophy can be traced to such luminaries at Gene Sharp, who was often employed by the military (yes the military), to use non-violent methods to topple governments. [Ref]
[…CONTINUE READING THIS ARTICLE]
[hat tip: Jan Irvin]
PN 