error This forum is not active, and new posts may not be made in it.
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

61587 Posts
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
1/10/2020 4:54:09 PM

Saeed Khan / AFP via Getty Images

Climate change fueled the Australia fires. Now those fires are fueling climate change.

Australia is in the midst of a devastating wildfire season that is being exacerbated by
climate change. But the fires, which have been burning for months and could rage on for months to come, are also impacting the earth’s climate in several ways. Some of those impacts are well understood, while others lie at the frontiers of scientific research.

The most obvious climatic impact of the fires is that they’re spewing millions of tons of heat-trapping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, contributing to a vicious feedback loop of heat and flame. But the fires are also kicking up lots of soot, creating a smoke plume that’s circling the globe and could hasten the melting of any glaciers it comes in contact with. Preliminary evidence suggests some of that smoke has even made its way into an upper layer of the atmosphere called the stratosphere, buoyed aloft by rare, fire-induced thunderclouds. That, too, could have subtle but far-reaching climate impacts.

The fires, which started burning at the end of Australia’s winter, raged across the eastern half of the country throughout the spring and kicked into high gear in the country’s populous southeast over the last few weeks. They’re a disaster of anunprecedented nature.

Exceptionally hot, dry, gusty weather, brought on by recurring ocean and atmospheric dynamics and amplified by the warming and drying effects of human-caused climate change, has made it all too easy for an errant match or a lightning strike to explode into a raging inferno. Which is exactly what’s been happening. To date, the Guardian estimates that more than 26 million acres of land have burned nationwide — a region larger than Indiana. That includes over 12 million acres in New South Wales alone, a dubious new record for the state.

Much of the land that’s burning is covered in eucalyptus forest, although flames have also razed farmlands, grasslands, heathlands, and even some patches of Queensland’s subtropical rainforests, said Lesley Hughes, an ecologist and climate scientist at Macquarie University in Sydney. Whatever the fuel source, the net effect on the atmosphere is a massive release of ash, dust, and a cocktail of different gases, including carbon dioxide.

From the start of September through early January, the wildfires released around 400 million tons of CO2, which is roughly the same amount the UK emits in an entire year, according to Mark Parrington, a senior scientist with the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts. That’s not a record, he said, noting that considerably more carbon was emitted in 2011 and 2012, when very large fires raged across Australia’s northern territory and out west. But in New South Wales, this year’s wildfire emissions are off the charts.

By any measure, 400 million tons is a significant chunk of heat-trapping gases that will get mixed into the atmosphere, fueling more global warming. “It’s a great example of a positive feedback of climate change,” Hughes said. “It all comes together, unfortunately.”

In addition to carbon pollution, the fires are producing, well, regular air pollution. Since early November, vast smoke plumes have been wafting from eastern Australia all the way across the Pacific to the shores of South America. Just this week, Parrington said, forecasts from the Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service showed carbon monoxide from wildfire smoke creeping into the South Atlantic, a “really clear indicator of just how intense those fires have been.”

As the smoke circumnavigates the globe, some of it is passing over New Zealand’s alpine glaciers, turning them an eerie caramel color. Lauren Vargo, a glaciologist at Victoria University of Wellington who recently traveled through New Zealand’s Southern Alps, said that the soot is “really clear and obvious” and that “most of the ice on the South Island” is likely to have been impacted. Vargo is currently studying aerial photographs of New Zealand’s glaciers going back to the 1970s. In 40 years of records, she hasn’t seen anything comparable.

Soot on glaciers does more than spoil hiking photos. It reduces the reflectivity, or albedo, of ice, allowing it to absorb more sunlight, which can hasten its melt, said Marie Dumont, the deputy scientific director of the French Meteorological Service’s Snow Research Center. Exactly how much extra melt New Zealand’s browning glaciers will experience over the coming weeks and months is unclear, but the fact that the color change is occurring during the summer, when the sunlight is fiercer and there’s less chance of fresh snow falling, isn’t a good sign.

“It’s super likely that it will accelerate the melt” of these glaciers, Dumont said, “at least for this year.” She added that she wouldn’t be surprised to see a similar, albeit smaller effect on some Patagonian glaciers, given that the wildfire smoke is passing over South America.

“With ice, when we are seeing a color change, it means the change in albedo is about 10 percent,” Dumont said. “That’s already huge. Even a 2 to 3 percent change is a lot.”

Not all of the wildfire smoke is settling on the earth’s surface. More of it is lingering 3 to 4 miles up in the troposphere, Parrington said, scattering light and resulting in ominous reddish sunsets. Where the smoke is densest, it’s likely impacting the weather, said Robert Field, a climate and atmospheric scientist at Columbia University. Over hard-hit parts of Australia, Field said he wouldn’t be surprised if temperatures are 10 to 20 degrees F lower on dense smoke days as soot blocks incoming sunlight. He emphasized, however, that any such effects will be very temporary.

Where the smoke might have a more far-reaching impact is in the stratosphere, a very dry, very cold part of the atmosphere that starts around 6 miles up and is home to fast-flowing jet stream winds. Pollution from the earth’s surface doesn’t often reach the stratosphere, but recent satellite data shows that Australia’s wildfire smoke has hit this lofty mark, a fact that speaks to “the power and intensity of the fires,” according to Claire Ryder, a research fellow at Reading University’s meteorology department.

The most likely explanation, she said, is fire-induced thunderclouds.

Also known as pyrocumulonimbus clouds, these menacing-looking storms, which form when heat from intense wildfires creates a powerful updraft, can blast particles into the stratosphere in a manner similar to a volcanic eruption. Over the past few weeks, the wildfires in southeastern Australia have spawned a series ofpyrocumulonimbus events that Neil Lareau, a fire weather researcher at the University of Nevada Reno, called “really superlative.”

The smoke that’s reached the stratosphere may linger there for weeks to months, Ryder said. But exactly what impact it’ll have is an open scientific question.

Volcanic eruptions, she said, shoot tiny sulfate aerosols into the stratosphere. These particles reflect sunlight and can trigger temporary cooling at the earth’s surface. By contrast, fire smoke contains carbon-rich organic matter, including particles that are brown, gray, and even black in color. Black carbon, in particular, is a potent absorber of sunlight, and whether its presence in stratospheric soot will ultimately have a warming or cooling effect on the planet is unknown.

It will likely be years before scientists have teased out the full impact of this year’s wildfire season on the climate — first, the fires need to end. But it’s clear the effects have rippled far beyond Australia’s borders. As fire seasons become longer and more intense across the world, understanding this complex web of planetary impacts will only become more urgent.


"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

Luis Miguel Goitizolo

61587 Posts
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
1/17/2020 5:23:20 PM


How people came to believe that individual choices could save the Earth

It was the late 1980s, and the headlines warned of acid rain, air pollution, and contaminated water. So John Javna, then a writer best known for books found on the back of toilets, traveled from drought-stricken California to Washington, D.C., with his backpack, looking for practical advice on how to save the world.

About to turn 40, Javna had written the bestselling Uncle John’s Bathroom Readerseries, full of trivia like the origin stories of Silly Putty and Gatorade. But this time he wanted to write something that would ease his fear that the world was falling apart. He showed up at the offices of the big environmental groups in D.C., collecting books and pamphlets full of eco-friendly tips (pre-internet, such things were harder to find) to cobble together a book full of green advice. Javna remembers being told by one environmental advocate that he was wasting his time.

His publishers weren’t fond of his idea, either. So in November 1989, without fanfare, Javna self-published the book he’d written in his attic in California: 50 Simple Things You Can Do to Save the Earth. The guide featured “unbelievably easy” steps, like installing low-flow showerheads and bringing cloth bags to the grocery store.

And then, seemingly out of nowhere, the book became a cultural phenomenon. With sales buoyed by media coverage and events surrounding Earth Day’s 20th anniversary in 1990, 50 Simple Things topped bestseller lists. It went on to sell 5 million copies and was translated into 23 languages, including Turkish and Bulgarian. The popularity spurred more than a dozen spinoffs in the 50 Simple Things series — including a kids’ version that Chelsea Clinton read growing up in the White House — that in the end sold just as many copies as the original.

“It was a pretty odd experience,” Javna said. “You’re sitting there doing the same thing you’ve always done, and suddenly the whole world starts looking at you, jumping up and down, and calling you on the phone.”

50 Simple Things had its share of critics, inspiring a genre of takedowns. They argued that meaningful change required complex and large-scale policy changes, not simple fixes. In 1991, Gar Smith wrote the article “50 Difficult Things You Can Do to Save the Earth,” featuring hardcore tips (“go to jail for something you believe in”) and calls for collective action (“pass a nature amendment to the U.S. Constitution”). Several years later, J. Robert Hunter wrote Simple Things Won’t Save the Earth, arguing that the growing popularity of eco-friendly products and habits gave people the false impression that environmental crises were being solved.

By the mid-90s, Javna had joined the critics. “I had this vision that it would be a gateway, an entry point, for people, and that they would get more and more involved,” he said. “After a few years, it was quite clear that they weren’t.” People were just snipping their plastic six-pack rings, feeling a little better about themselves, and calling it a day.

50 Simple Things was featured on the front page of USA Today, January 24, 1990. John Javna

So Javna pulled his book from print and moved his family to rural Oregon, where he still lives today, two decades later. He even stopped taking his own eco-friendly tips.

“What did it matter if I recycled paper, if the ancient forests were still being chopped down?” Javna wrote in reflection in 2008. “Who cared if I celebrated ‘no car day’ when 80 percent of the cars on the road had one person in them? There was mercury in the air, and tons of waste was being dumped in the ocean daily. Every time I looked in the garbage and saw a pile of aluminum cans, I felt like giving up.”

While many climate activists today are demanding an entire overhaul of the economy and political system, they continue to wrestle with their personal contributions to the climate crisis: air travel, meat-eating, driving a car. At this year’s Golden Globe Awards — where the menu was completely vegan and glasses of water replaced plastic bottles — celebrities called on each other to step up. “It’s great to vote, but sometimes we have to take that responsibility on ourselves and make changes and sacrifices in our own lives,” said Joaquin Phoenix, who won Best Actor. “We don’t have to take private jets to Palm Springs for the awards.”

Individual responsibility for the environment has become what Javna calls “the wallpaper of culture” — taken for granted. Despite selling nearly as many copies as Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring, the book that launched a wave of awareness around the pesticide DDT in the 1960s, 50 Simple Things has been largely forgotten by the public. The book doesn’t even have a Wikipedia page. Yet it might have changed how millions of people think about their role in environmental destruction — and how they act in response.

Sidewalk art from Earth Day 1990. Ron Bull / Toronto Star via Getty Images

In 2006, Javna’s 13-year-old daughter, Sophie, asked him why their family didn’t compost anymore. “You should care about this stuff!” she remembers thinking. “You’re like the person who should care.”

Sophie was close to her dad growing up. They’d go on walks on the trail behind their house in Ashland, talking about life, and as she got more excited about recycling and farmers markets, she started getting on his case. Her conversations with her dad prompted him to revive the long-dead book and rewrite it in collaboration with his kids, with a new focus.

“It dawned on me that I couldn’t afford to be cynical — I had to keep trying to make the world better — because I love my son and daughter, and because I love this planet,” Javna wrote in the introduction to the revised 2008 edition of 50 Simple Things.

The new book was still broken into steps but encouraged readers to pick one cause — like bringing back the electric car or saving coral reefs — and get involved with environmental organizations, pressure companies to do better, and lobby their legislators for their cause. In other words, no more slacktivism.

The idea that individuals could help fix the planet’s overwhelming environmental problems was already part of the American psyche in 1970, the year of the very first Earth Day, when 20 million Americans joined in the events. Across the country, demonstrators demanded that politicians clean up the air and water, and the ensuing decade brought the establishment of the Environmental Protection Agency along with the Clean Water Act and Endangered Species Act, along with scores of environmental regulations.

“In 1970, everyone took for granted that tough laws were needed to protect and clean up the environment,” said Adam Rome, professor of environment and sustainability of the University at Buffalo.

The flurry of environmental action books that came out in the early 1970s included practical advice, like how to make your own soap, but they tended to conclude with a stirring call for citizens to demand large-scale change. The children’s book S.O.S. Save Our Earth, published in 1972, ends with a section telling kids to send postcards with examples of pollution to their city council, members of Congress, and the Interior Department, responsible for overseeing national parks and forests.

And then came the 1980s, a tough decade for the environmental movement. Ronald Reagan’s two-term presidency, in its zeal to unleash the free market, eroded faith in government action. “It was eight lost years — years of lost time that cannot be made up and where a lot of damage was done that may not be reparable,” George T. Frampton Jr, then-president of the Wilderness Society, told the New York Times in 1989, the same year that Javna self-published 50 Simple Things.

The era brought a shift in how Americans thought of themselves — not so much as citizens but as consumers who could vote with their spending power.

The strategy of boycotting Coca-Cola for its involvement in apartheid South Africaended up working in 1986, when the company withdrew its operations from the country. Throughout the 1990s, Nike faced boycotts over low wages and poor working conditions in its factories. Environmentalists thought something similar could work for them. The focus shifted from collective action to consumer action: pushing businesses to be more sustainable and living a greener lifestyle.

A Dear Abby column from July 1990 called 50 Simple Things “required reading for everyone entering the 21st century.”John Javna

In his introduction to the original 50 Simple Things, Chris Calwell of the Natural Resources Defense Council, wrote that institutions alone couldn’t solve environmental problems, but the sum of millions of people taking action just might. “My trash, your use of inefficient cars, someone else’s water use — all make the planet less livable for the children of today and tomorrow. But remember: as much as we are the root of the problem, we are also the genesis of its solution. Go to it!”

That kind of thinking had it backwards, Rome said. “Only people who had been worn out from a decade of fighting would say that, because it’s obviously the opposite of what you need to say. Until institutions change, we aren’t going to solve any of these problems.”

After the Javnas finished rewriting 50 Simple Things in 2008, they turned their focus to the food system. Sophie now lives in Minneapolis and serves on the Equity, Inclusion, and Justice committee of the national branch of Slow Food, an organization working for a cleaner, fairer food system. And during the Great Recession, when Javna’s local food bank in Ashland announced it might have to close some days, he decided to do something about it.

“My neighbors would be perfectly willing to give something if it was made easy for them,” Javna remembers thinking. So he helped develop a system to go door-to-door to pick up food, which turned into the Ashland Food Project in 2009. It’s still going today. Donors fill a green bag with nonperishable food once every two months and put it outside their front door. The neighborhood coordinators pick up the bags and deliver them to local food banks. The idea is that each person does a small part — a “simple thing” — but understands that their part is just as essential as everyone else’s.

“We hope that this will become a different kind of paradigm in grassroots action,” Javna said. The project has brought millions of pounds of food to local food banks, with nearly a quarter of households in Ashland participating. The model has spread to dozens of communities, spawning independent Food Projects from the West Coast to Massachusetts, Kentucky, and Florida.

50 Simple Things taught me that you can do something small in your attic, and it can have this unexpected impact on other people,” Javna said. With his work in Ashland, he’s spent the last decade figuring out how to design a system for social change that makes it easy and compelling for people to stay involved instead of losing steam. “You take somebody’s impulse to do something on their own and combine it with other people’s impulse to do it on their own, and engineer a system that makes it possible for each of them to play a part in creating a bigger impact,” he said.

John Javna

Two decades after 50 Simple Things came out, the environmental movement is gaining momentum again. Or rather, “Momentum” — a relatively new organizing strategy that’s influenced the Black Lives Matter movement as well as climate-focused groups like Extinction Rebellion and the Sunrise Movement. It offers a blueprint for sustaining social movements, instead of watching them peter out after a protest or two. As Rebecca Leber wrote for Mother Jones, the idea behind it is to come up with a narrative of what you want to accomplish, attract a wider base through protests, and then round up eager new members to join in-person trainings. Filling city streets with one well-attended march is just the beginning, rather than the end goal.

“In the end, if anything works, it’s not spreading yourself as thin as possible and doing the easiest possible things,” Javna said. The path to success, he believes, is joining a community of people trying to change something for the better — and if the system is set up effectively, then doing the right thing becomes simple.


"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

Luis Miguel Goitizolo

61587 Posts
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
1/20/2020 5:21:11 PM

Pentagon makes ludicrous claim that US invasion made Iraq 'more secure and prosperous'

iraq city bombed

The generous US "reconstruction" of Iraqi cities
The United States Department of Defense claims that its military presence makes Iraq more "secure and prosperous", despite calls by Iraqi lawmakers for the removal of all foreign troops from the country and growing tensions with Iran.
"At this time, there are no plans by the US military to withdraw from Iraq," Assistant to the Secretary of Defense Jonathan Rath Hoffman told reporters at a press briefing, RT reported.

"And I think it's been obvious... that the consensus in Iraq seems to be that the United States forces there are a force for good," he added.

The official also stated that "the US presence in the country is beneficial to Iraq" and that it "will continue to lead to increased security and prosperity for the Iraqi people".
Despite Hoffman's confidence, his words seem to be at odds with the Iraqi Parliament, which on January 5 passed a non-binding resolution asking caretaker Prime Minister Adil Abdul Mahdi to cancel the request for "military assistance" from the US-led coalition.

The vote took place two days after a US drone strike assassinated Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Qods Force Commander Lieutenant General Qassem Soleiman and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, deputy commander of Iraq's Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), or Hashad al-Shabi, when their convoy was leaving Baghdad's airport. Soleimani was scheduled to meet Abdul Mahdi that day.

Iran retaliated in response to Soleimani's assassination by firing several ballistic missiles at Iraqi bases that house US personnel. The United States Armed Forces have been stationed in Iraq since 2003, when a Washington-led coalition attacked the country to topple its longtime leader Saddam Hussein.

The US, UK, as well as many other NATO and Western allies and vassals have been making sure Iraq was more "secure and prosperous" at least since the early '90s, when the US Armed Forces, supported by its allies and vassals, sent cruise missiles and bombers to drop "US aid" on millions of Iraqi civilians.
aircraft carrier iraq
US aircraft carrier crew send "love" to the Iraqi people
United States President Donald Trump warned that American, or any other NATO or allied troops will not be withdrawn from the country unless Iraq "compensates for money spent on a US airbase in the country", and promised "sanctions if Iraq was to refuse to do so"
Let's see the many ways in which the US made Iraq more "secure and prosperous":
iraq museum looted bombed

Iraqi National Museum head thrilled at US troops making the millennia-old artifacts "more prosperous"
oil spill iraq US soldier

US soldier standing above an oil pool formed due to a damaged pipeline, worried about the "prosperity" of American oil which God obviously mistakenly placed in Iraq
Abu Ghraib prison
© Associted Press
A US soldier with a naked detainee at the Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad.
baghdad soccer field cemetary

Another example of a "more prosperous" Iraq; soccer fields being turned into cemeteries in order to accommodate all of the "lucky" recipients of "US aid"
bomb missiles baghdad ira war

Baghdad being made more "secure and prosperous"


"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

Luis Miguel Goitizolo

61587 Posts
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
1/24/2020 4:28:59 PM

20 Million Quarantined as “Deadly” Coronavirus Reaches the U.S.

In the wake of a new respiratory virus, Chinese authorities have shut down at least 5 cities, impacting tens of millions of people. The coronavirus, which first appeared only a month ago, has infected more than 630 people and is responsible for at least 17 deaths so far. The World Health Organization (WHO) is expected to declare a global health emergency sometime today.

The virus is believed to have originated in the Chinese city of Wuhan – home to 11 million people and a major port of travel. According to air traffic data collected by The New York Times, about 30,000 people fly out of Wuhan on an average day.

This weekend is also the Lunar New Year holiday, for which Chinese citizens typically travel in greater numbers. But as reports of the virus have spread to Taiwan, Vietnam, Singapore, South Korea, Thailand, Japan, and the U.S., severe travel restrictions have left the city in an implied quarantine.

In addition to Wuhang’s 11 million residents, the neighboring city of Huanggang – home to 7 million – has also been placed on lockdown. By the end of the day,authorities also plan to suspend travel from the cities of Ezhou, Chibi, and Zhijang, home to about 2 million combined citizens.

Schools have canceled events and the capital canceled two of the nation’s largest Lunar New Year temple fairs. Airports around the world are conducting additional screening, and hundreds of millions of holiday travelers have been affected.

A government statement said that residents of the quarantined cities would not be allowed to leave without special permission.

The shut down of Wuhang alone is record-breaking. “The lockdown of 11 million people is unprecedented in public health history,” said Gauden Galea, the WHO’s Beijing representative.

The Chinese government is attempting to quarantine roughly 25 million people – more than the entire population of Florida.

But health officials feel these are necessary steps, fearing that the transmission rate will accelerate with the holiday travel. The coronavirus seems to have an extended incubation period, which means there could be many people carrying and transmitting the virus before they begin to show any symptoms.

Neil Ferguson, a professor at the MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis at Imperial College London, says that there are substantially more cases than have been confirmed so far. Based on the 5-6 day incubation period and 4-5 day delay from the start of symptoms to a diagnosis, the true number of people infected could be over 20,000.

The quarantine is not limited to China, as the first confirmed patient in the U.S. remains in isolation. He arrived in Seattle just over a week ago after traveling to China. After suffering from breathing difficulty and fever, he reached out to doctors and has been trapped at the hospital ever since.

He is not allowed to leave.

Coronavirus Spreads to the States

Just a few hours before publishing this article, another man arrived at LAX who is suspected of carrying the virus. Arriving on a flight from Mexico City, he was hospitalized and isolated for a precautionary evaluation.

Barbara Ferrer, director of the Department of Public Health, said there have been an average of 40 to 60 passengers daily arriving at LAX from the Wuhan area since the health screenings began. So far, none have been flagged for additional testing.

We are told that this outbreak could be massive. From The Washington Post:

A bigger outbreak is certain,” said Guan Yi, a virologist who helped identify severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2003. He estimated — “conservatively,” he said — that this outbreak could be 10 times bigger than the SARS epidemic because that virus was transmitted by only a few “super spreaders” in a more defined part of the country.

We have passed through the ‘golden period’ for prevention and control,” he told Caixin magazine from self-imposed quarantine after visiting Wuhan. “What’s more, we’ve got the holiday traffic rush and a dereliction of duty from certain officials.”

Several U.S. airports are now screening passengers, and a middle school in Virginia has cancelled its Chinese exchange student program. The Chinese students landed at John F. Kennedy airport yesterday (one of the airports conducting “enhanced health screenings” – and were told in a letter that they would not be attending the school.)

Instead, they will be heading to Washington, D.C. to participate in “cultural and educational activities.”

Although experts believe the virus originated from animals, it is now transferable from human to human. Most coronaviruses cause mild symptoms such as the common cold that patients easily recover from. Other strains of the virus – such as SARS and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) – can cause pneumonia and possible death.

SARS killed 770 of 8,000 people infected in 2002-2003. MERS killed about three or four out of every 10 people infected, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said. Human coronaviruses are passed through coughing and sneezing, close personal contact, touching objects with the virus on it and then touching the mouth, nose or eyes before washing your hands.

Because this new disease is viral, antibiotics would not be a viable option for treatment. However, nebulizing silvermay be an effective remedy, as well as essential oils and chlorine dioxide.

“Millions Could Die”?

Over the past couple of decades, we’ve seen lots of “possibly deadly” viruses unleashed …

“Watch out for Swine Flu!”

“SARS pandemic coming!”

“Ebola could wipe out humanity!”

“This could be the big one and millions could die.”

But then they didn’t …

I’m not saying this is the case with the coronavirus, because it certainly could be deadly, and it appears that it may have been “bioengineered” and possibly weaponized. I’m just saying that we need to remember that fear makes people do things that they may not normally do otherwise … like accepting a “coronavirus vaccination.”

According to Jon Rappoport:

Epidemics are good for business. Pharmaceutical business, inducing fear business, shutting down travel business, diverting the public from key events business, surveillance and quarantine business, and so on.”

Freedom? Forget it. Public safety is the ace in the deck. It wins every time. Hell, we may need a good epidemic in the US, so we can exert more control over the unruly citizenry. The doctor is king. Do what he says. Always. How many vaccines are there now? Take all of them. Everyone must.”

Look what we’ve seen in the USA! An “outbreak” of measles that resulted in zero fatalities, massive abuse of power, and legislation that flies in the face of our constitutional freedom.

New York City tried to force families to receive vaccines or be fined. Electronic health records have been used to hunt down families who aren’t vaccinated. Religious and personal exemptions are being stripped away at a rapid pace. Even doctors have been forced to surrender medical decisions to the government.

We’ve seen the government strip children away from their parents and force them to receive chemotherapy. We’ve seen new laws that would allow doctors to vaccinate children without their parents’ consent or knowledge. How long before Child Protective Services comes knocking on your door asking to see your child’s vaccination records?

Coronavirus Patent & Vaccine

In 2015, a patent was filed by The Pirbright Institute for the live, attenuated coronavirus. The application claims that the new virus could be used to create a vaccine for treating or preventing respiratory viruses. The patent was awarded in 2018.

Now, The Pirbright Institute is funded by the UK Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs, the WHO, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. All of these entities have been loud supporters of mandatory vaccinations and more government control based on “health concerns.”

And for several years, Bill Gates has been telling us that a pandemic is coming, and in November of 2019, collaborating with the World Economic Forum, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation hosted “Event 201” where they ran a simulation of a coronavirus pandemic.


Don’t tell me, let me guess … Bill Gates just happens to have a vaccine all ready for this coronavirus outbreak, right?

The Bottom Line

Please be vigilant and stay tuned for updates. This type of virus could be extremely dangerous given how long it takes to incubate and its ability to mutate and form new versions of itself. So-called “experts” have said that this could be 10 times worse than the SARS outbreak earlier this century. China is attempting the largest single quarantine in history.

About 10 months ago, I wrote an article about the pending medical tyranny. Sadly, many of my concerns have already come to fruition. These changes are happening everyday RIGHT UNDER OUR NOSES. And mark my words:

The coronavirus will pave the way for new legislation and new attacks on our freedom.

You’ve heard about frogs and boiling water? If you drop a frog into a pot of boiling water, he will quickly hop out and save himself. But if you place the frog in lukewarm water, slowly turning up the temperature one degree at a time, the frog will acclimate until he is boiled alive.

Don’t be a frog.

The temperature has been increasing for years now, and it’s time to get out of the pot. No matter how this disease started or how far it spreads, I can promise you that someone will find a way to profit, and we will soon see legislation and emergency measures that trample on our freedom of speech, freedom to choose our medical care, and freedom to make decisions for our children.

About Charlene Bollinger

Charlene Bollinger is a devoted Christian, happily married wife, joyful mother of 4 beautiful home-educated children, health freedom advocate, and co-founder and CEO of The Truth About Cancer. She is a former model and actress, fitness buff, and lover of healthy food and living. After losing several family members to conventional cancer treatments, Charlene and Ty learned the truth about cancer and the cancer industry, working together tirelessly to help others to learn the truth that sets them free to live healthy, happy lives. Charlene speaks at many conferences and is a guest on various health-related radio shows helping people discover that cancer does NOT have to be a death sentence. Together, they host a biweekly internet news program: TTAC Global Health News.

"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

Luis Miguel Goitizolo

61587 Posts
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
1/28/2020 6:34:45 PM

Just 3% of What the US Spends Destroying Countries Could End Starvation—On the Entire Planet

January 23, 2020

It was reported this week that the Pentagon made $35 trillion — with a ‘T’ — in accounting adjustments in 2019 alone. That number is larger than the entire U.S. economy and is up from $30.7 trillion in 2018. The figure also dwarfs the Congressional approved military budget of $738 billion. Naturally, no one cares and Pentagon officials dismiss this black hole of spending as accounting errors.

“Within that $30 trillion is a lot of double, triple, and quadruple counting of the same money as it got moved between accounts,” said Todd Harrison, a Pentagon budget expert with the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

The “combined errors, shorthand, and sloppy record-keeping by DoD accountants do add up to a number nearly 1.5 times the size of the U.S. economy,” said Representative Jackie Speier, who asked the Government Accountability Office to investigate. The report shows the Pentagon “employs accounting adjustments like a contractor paints over mold. Their priority is making the situation look manageable, not solving the underlying problem,” she said.

This problem is only getting worse too. As Bloomberg reported, the Defense Department acknowledged that it failed its first-ever audit in 2018 and then again last year, when it reviewed $2.7 trillion in assets and $2.6 trillion in liabilities. Despite the shame of failing—twice—the accounting “errors” have grown.

Imagine running a company in which you accounted for spending like they do at the Pentagon. If you were the CFO, you’d be fired, if and only if the entire business didn’t already collapse. However, because these morons have an unlimited pool of tax revenue and Federal Reserve dollars from which to draw resources, they are allowed to continue down this unaccountable path toward unsustainable debt and spending.

In the meantime, Democrats and Republicans alike remain silent as questioning the military industrial complex is akin to a thought crime. The war machine must go on and continue to expand or else they’ll find themselves out of a job. The majority of Americans follow the same code of silence when it comes to military spending. Boobus Americanus sits back in his recliner as his grandchildren’s future is squandered by mass murderers dropping million dollar bombs on people living in tents on the other side of the planet — for ‘freedom’ — of course.

Despite audits and scrutiny from those paying attention, the Pentagon has only continued to lose money by the trillions since 9/11, and a report analyzing the budgets of the Department of Defense (DoD) and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) shows that the total is more than $21 trillion.

The report attributes the missing funds to a series of “unsupported journal voucher adjustments” made to the departments’ budgets. These adjustments are not tied to specific accounting transactions, but they are often included in account summaries to cover for balances between systems that cannot be reconciled.

As The Free Thought Project has reported, not only is it likely that the actual amount of money the DoD and HUD cannot account for is much higher than $21 trillion, due to the fact that researchers did not have access to complete data, but the practice of creating counterfeit adjustments appears to be standard procedure.

“Perhaps even more troubling than the total amount lost is the fact that fraudulent behavior from HUD and DOD seem to be the standard operating procedure. In fact, the accounting for these funds is so poor, that as Reuters notes, the Defense Finance and Accounting Services (DFAS) refers to the preparation of the Army’s year-end statements as ‘the grand plug’ — ‘plug’ is accounting jargon for the insertion of made-up numbers.

For every transaction, a so-called ‘journal voucher’ that provides serial numbers, transaction dates and the amount of the expenditure is supposed to be produced. The report specifies that the agency has done such a poor job in providing documentation of their transactions, that there is no way to actually know how $21 trillion has been spent.”

The problem is so bad, that these warmongers have ‘lost’ $58,386 per second since 9/11.

Those of us not blinded by the propaganda and false patriotism, see the inevitable results of such a propensity for supporting war. We see domestic infrastructure crumbling, a national debt increasing by record amounts each year, more conflict around the globe, and countless veterans suffering from PTSD. When will it all end? At this pace, it won’t end until the empire falls.

Luckily, there are people waging a campaign to prevent further war and subsequent deficit spending. They are paying to put up billboards showing just how much of your money the US steals to blow up brown people in foreign countries. The group is World Beyond War and their efforts are massive. For the last several years, they’ve been putting up powerful billboards all over the country. One of them can be seen below.

They back these numbers up with data on their website, pointing out that in 2008, the United Nations said that $30 billion per year could end hunger on earth, as reported in the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and many other outlets. The Food and Agriculture Organization has not updated that figure since 2008, and has recently told us that such figures do not require much updating. In a separate report, most recently published in 2015, the same organization provides a figure of $265 billion as the cost per year for 15 years to permanently eliminate extreme poverty, which would eliminate starvation and malnutrition — a broader project than just preventing starvation one year at a time. The FAO’s spokesperson informed us in an email: “I think it would be incorrect to compare the two figures as the 265 billion has been calculated taking into consideration a number of initiatives including social protection cash transfers aimed at extracting people from extreme poverty and not just hunger.”

As of 2019, the annual Pentagon base budget, plus war budget, plus nuclear weapons in the Department of Energy, plus Homeland Security and other military spending totaled well over $1 trillion — not counting what’s “lost.”

3% of $1 trillion = $30 billion.

So, 3% of U.S. military spending could end starvation on earth.

22% of $1.2 trillion = $265 billion.

So, 22 percent of U.S. military spending for 15 years could permanently end extreme poverty globally.

With the globe spending roughly $2 trillion per year on militarism (roughly half of it by the United States), we can also say that 1.5% of GLOBAL military spending could end starvation on earth.

Are you ready to end all war yet? We are.

"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)


Like us on Facebook!