things

by Devvy Kidd – May 12, 2012

Warning: Explicit language

Obama/Soetoro/Dunham is a champion of infanticide – the killing of infants. While serving in the Illinois State Senate, Barry Soetoro aka Barack Obama, voted three times to allow infants who survive abortion must be left to lay there and die.

Yes, he did vote against the Illinois Born Alive Infant Protection Act. Click here to see the bills and his comments supporting murder.

Would you stand there and allow a living, breathing infant to die if you were a doctor or nurse? How could anyone, doctor, nurse or just plain human stand by and allow an infant who has survived the horror of abortion – just let them die without trying to save that precious life? Soetoro did because his soul died a long time ago. And, how did Barry justify it?

“Listen to audio from Obama’s 2002 IL Senate floor debate wherein he argued that while babies might be aborted alive, it would be a “burden” to a mother’s “original decision” to assess and treat them.” In other words, the mother wished to kill the infant, so be it.

54% of “Catholics” voted for Soetoro in 2008. They voted to elect an individual who denied three times the right of a living, breathing infant born of madness the right to live.

Say, I wonder if those “Catholics” got the hope and change they voted into office even though they had no right to vote for an ineligible candidate? God will ask them someday.

Full article here

by Joe Wolverton, II – May 11, 2012

As the United States of America is manipulated closer and closer to an economic and social abyss, the concomitant consequences of this decline are becoming familiar to all citizens. In fact, many of the youth, whose future is being mortgaged by those determined to perpetuate never-ending war and ever-expanding national debt, are awakening to a sense of this dire situation. And they are recurring to the brief history of our nation to locate a lever for braking the runaway train hurtling toward the ruin of our Republic.

This generation is subjected as none before them to the painful injection of government into every fiber of the body politic. On what seems like a daily schedule, the Congress passes and the President signs into law measures ostensibly permitting the manhandling of people at airports, the suspension of the requirements of due process, and the monitoring by the never-blinking eye of a surveillance state into the virtual and actual behavior of anyone believed to one day possibly pose a threat to the security of “the homeland.”

As they sift among the various legal methods available to them for the civil combat against economic enslavement and the federal government’s intrusions into every aspect of our lives, they have stumbled across a timeless principle of self-defense used by our Founding Fathers to fight their own battle against the forces of federal oppression — nullification.

Simply stated, nullification is a concept of legal statutory construction that endows each state with the right to nullify, or invalidate, any federal measure that a state deems unconstitutional. Nullification is founded on the assertion that the sovereign states formed the union, and as creators of the compact, they hold ultimate authority as to the limits of the power of the central government to enact laws that are applicable to the states and the citizens thereof.

Full article here

by radyananda – May 9, 2012

An international team of researchers recently confirmed that children who drink fresh milk – unprocessed and unpasteurized – have a better immune response to allergens and are far less likely to develop asthma.

This comes amidst a concerted state and federal effort to criminalize raw milk in the US, with a Minnesota trial and protest scheduled for Monday, May 14.

Researchers from Indiana, Switzerland, and Germany ran surveys and tests on Swiss and US children aged 6-12 years and submitted their results to the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology last month.

Because the Amish emigrated from Switzerland, and are thus genetically similar, the team compared Northern Indiana Amish farm children with today’s Swiss kids. Though rural kids are known to be healthier than city kids, the team found that the Amish have a superior immune response to allergens and asthma than even Swiss farm kids have.

“Finally a health professional in America conducted research into the low incidence of allergies among farm kids,” said Kimberly Hartke, publicist for the Weston A. Price Foundation in an email to Food Freedom News. “This research validates what European researchers have already discovered: Raw milk is health-promoting.”

Full article here

by VC – May 8, 2012

The push to make the internet a controlled space used to spy on citizens, where supposedly “private” information is automatically shared with authorities, might soon reach another threshold. A new report suggests that the FBI is currently discussing with major internet companies such as Microsoft, Facebook, Yahoo and Google to build backdoor accesses to their services to facilitate government surveillance. The FBI is also attempting to convince these companies to support an upcoming law that would allow the outright spying of social networks, VoIP, and Web e-mail providers. The law, like many other similar ones that are being proposed and adopted, is in direct violation with the 4th Amendment, which states: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

Of course, those who wrote the Bill of Rights were not expecting the advent of the internet and the storing of information on remote servers. The application of its principles is however nebulous today. However, if those in power truly wished (and if citizens somewhat cared) to preserve the spirit of the Amendment (which was created to protect citizens from government oppression and tyranny) they would have extended the principles of the Fourth Amendment to cyberspace. We are however witnessing the exact opposite: The advent of the internet, of social networks and other technologies appears to be the perfect opportunity for state authorities to deny these historic rights to citizens and to move towards a high tech police state.

Full article here

by Dr David Jockers – May 3, 2012

Due to our society’s love of sugar, scientists have been able to synthetically produce artificial sweeteners and flavor enhancers. These artificial sweeteners give us the same pleasure as sugar without the calories and dangerous effects on insulin signaling and triglyceride formation. This includes aspartame, acefultame potassium, monosodium glutamate, sucralose and many others. Unfortunately, these artificial sweeteners and flavor enhancers break down into highly toxic chemical agents that damage important regions of the body.

Ideal sweeteners are formed in nature and are minimally processed. These would include organic sugar, stevia, raw honey, maple syrup, etc. The greater the processing the more dangerous the sweetener can potentially be. Artificial sweeteners are often devised completely in a laboratory or they begin as sugar and undergo massive processing. Some of the most dangerous artificial sweeteners & flavor enhancers include the following:

Full article here

by Lew Rockwell – Apr 27, 2012

by Lee Duigon – Apr 19, 2012

What will it take to convince America’s Christian parents to stop sending their children to the public schools?

Earlier this month, a girl at Pilgrim High School in Warwick, Rhode Island, had her artwork censored by “educators.” The student had painted a mural that was deemed objectionable because it depicted a boy growing up, marrying, and having a child. In fact, the “educators” found it so offensive that they ordered it blotted out by painting over it.

The girl’s parents called a local radio talk show to complain, and the fat was in the fire. (Full story, plus photos)

Responding to public outrage, the superintendent of schools overruled the high school censors and allowed the student to paint her mural as she pleased, and the school board chairwoman said “the order to paint over the traditional marriage portion of the artwork should never have happened.”

Had the parents not called the radio show, and had the school district not been dragged onto center stage as an example of political correctness run amok, the censorship order would have stood. Marriage and the family, at Pilgrim High School, would have remained, for all practical purposes, obscene.

The story is not that the censorship was overruled. The story is that public educators think that marriage and the family are obscene. Really—what if kids should have to pass by that mural on their way to a Gay-Straight Alliance meeting? They shouldn’t have to see something like that!

Full article here