Menu



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

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
6/5/2016 11:04:33 AM

100,000+ people in Alabama told not to use tap water due to chemical contamination

Published time: 3 Jun, 2016 03:42


© Nguyen Huy Kham / Reuters

Chemical contamination has left over 100,000 Alabamans without drinkable tap water, possibly until the fall, according to a warning issued by officials on Thursday.

The West Morgan-East Lawrence Water Authority (WMEL) advised roughly 100,000 Alabama residents not to use their tap water for drinking or cooking, as it has been contaminated with potentially hazardous chemicals that can cause cancer, birth defects, and developmental problems in children.

The warning comes on the heels of a US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) advisory that revealed higher than previously thought levels of synthetic chemicals known as PFOS (Perfluorooctane sulfonate) and PFOA (perfluorooctanoic acid) in Alabama waters. Scientists found PFOS and PFOA in the blood of “nearly all the people they tested,” but in low concentrations, the EPA said in its May 19 warning.

WMEL general manager Don Sims has advised residents in Lawrence and Morgan Counties to avoid tap water for either drinking or cooking until further notice.

The utility supplies water to nearly 100,000 people in the two counties, as well as up to 10,000 direct residential customers.

“I recommend that all our customers do not drink our water, until we are able to bring the temporary system our engineer is designing online,” Sims said at a news conference.

The warning covers not only fresh water, but even water boiled and filtered at home, since neither method can remove the chemical contaminants.

After building up in people and animals over time, PFOS and PFOA can also cause liver and thyroid damage, as well as immune system problems, with small children and expectant women the two categories most at risk.

“I would rather be over-cautious than under-cautious,” Sims said. “I’m not a doctor, I’m not a chemist, but when they tell one class of people the water is not safe, I don’t want to be the one to say ‘you drink it and you don’t.’ So I said nobody drink it.”

READ MORE: Detroit resumes water shutoffs that could impact 20,000 customers

The warning could remain in place until at least the fall, when a $4 million “temporary system” is expected to replace the current one, possibly in September, according to news website AL.com.

In the meantime, the water authority said that it has no “means to provide bottled water for its customers in the interim,”AL.com reported.

The temporary filter is supposed to support the affected Alabama counties until at least 2019, when a permanent system will become operational. Sims has previously estimated that the filter will cost from $30 to $50 million, AL.com reported.


The water authority determined that the chemical contamination came from companies located upstream on the Tennessee River, including the 3M Company, which discharges PFOS and PFOA in their manufacturing processes. The synthetic chemicals are widely used to make nonstick cookware, waterproof clothes, carpet sealants and fire-fighting foams.

According to AL.com, 3M vice president and corporate medical director Dr. Carol Ley counters the claim that the chemicals pose a risk, saying that the company’s workers, who are in contact with them for long periods of time, have not shown any evidence that exposure is detrimental to their health.

3M also issued a statement on Thursday, rejecting the EPA’s warnings and health concerns.

“Although we support the work of the EPA and other regulators, we believe these advisory levels are overly conservative,”Dr. Ley said in a statement. “We believe that PFOS and PFOA do not present health risks at levels they are typically found in the environment or in human blood,” Ley said, citing workers who “show no adverse health effects from PFC exposure.”

The local water authority sued 3M and other companies last October “to hold them responsible for cleaning up our water.”

(RT)


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

+2
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
6/5/2016 11:20:09 AM

Worst Jobs Report In Nearly 6 Years – 102 Million Working Age Americans Do Not Have Jobs

JUNE 4, 2016


By Michael Snyder

This is exactly what we have been expecting to happen. On Friday, the Bureau of Labor Statistics announced that the U.S. economy only added 38,000 jobs in May. This was way below the 158,000 jobs that analysts were projecting, and it is also way below what is needed just to keep up with population growth. In addition, the number of jobs created in April was revised down by 37,000 and the number of jobs created in March was revised down by 22,000. This was the worst jobs report in almost six years, and the consensus on Wall Street is that it was an unmitigated disaster.

The funny thing is that the Obama administration says that the unemployment rate actually wentdown last month. Almost every month since Obama has been in the White House, large numbers of Americans that have been unemployed for a very long time are shifted from the “unemployment” category to the “not in the labor force” category. This has resulted in a steadily falling “unemployment rate” even though the percentage of the population that is actually working has not changed very much at all since the depths of the last recession.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics claims that the number of Americans “not in the labor force” increased by 664,000 from April to May. If you believe that, I have a giant bridge on the west coast that I would like to sell you. The labor force participation rate is now down to 62.6, and it is hovering just above a 38-year low.

When you add the number of working age Americans that are “officially unemployed” (7.4 million) to the number of working age Americans that are considered to be “not in the labor force” (an all-time record high of 94.7 million), you get a grand total of 102.1 million working age Americans that do not have a job right now.

This is not a game.

So far in 2016, three members of my own extended family have lost their jobs.

According to Challenger, Gray & Christmas, layoffs at major firms are running 24 percent higher up to this point in 2016 than they were during the same time period in 2015.

It was only a matter of time before those layoffs started showing up in the official employment numbers, and I fully expect that this trend will accelerate in the months ahead.

And here are some other brand new numbers for you to consider…

  • Since Barack Obama entered the White House, 14,179,000 Americans have “left the labor force” according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
  • The quality of our jobs continues to deteriorate. In May, 59,000 full-time jobs were lost, but 118,000 part-time jobs were gained.
  • Since September 2014, 207,000 mining jobs have been lost.
  • We just learned that U.S. factory orders have declined once again. This marks the 18th month in a row that this has taken place, and we have never seen such an extended decline outside of a major recession.
  • JPMorgan’s “recession indicators” have just soared to the highest level that we have seen since the last recession.

Needless to say, the financial community is pretty horrified by all of this news. They were expecting a much better jobs report, and many of them are not hiding their disappointment. Here is one example from the Wall Street Journal

This was an unqualified dud of a jobs report,” said Curt Long, chief economist at the National Association of Federal Credit Unions, noting “the unemployment rate fell, but for the wrong reason as labor force participation declined for the second consecutive month.”

And here is another example that comes from David Donabedian, the chief investment officer at Atlantic Trust Wealth Management…

We can’t find a positive nugget in today’s job report. If we were looking for signs of strength in this report, there is nothing to hang onto here.

But of course the mainstream media is doing their best to put a positive spin on these numbers. For instance, CNN just published a laughable article entitled “America’s economy is stronger than weak jobs report.”

And the White House insists that this new employment report really isn’t that big of a deal

The White House doesn’t get “too disappointed” over the number of unemployed and underemployed Americans.

“I’ve been reacting to jobs numbers here at the White House for more than seven years, and what is true today has been true in the past, which is, we don’t get too excited when jobs numbers are better than expected and we don’t get too disappointed when jobs numbers one-month are lower than expected,” White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest told CNBC.

But of course the truth is that it is a really big deal. We just received major confirmation that the U.S. economy has slipped into recession mode.

For months, I have been writing about how virtually every other indicator has been screaming that a new economic crisis had already begun.

But the employment numbers had remained fairly decent up until now. Employment is typically considered to be a “lagging indicator,” which means that it isn’t one of the first places we would expect to see signs of a recession show up. However, it is inevitable that the official unemployment numbers will reflect an economic downturn eventually, and that is what we are starting to see now.

What this means is that you probably have even less time to get prepared for what is ahead than you may have originally thought.

The U.S. economy has already entered the early chapters of the next great economic crisis, and most of the population is going to be caught totally off guard and will suffer tremendously.

If our leaders had made better decisions since the last crisis, things could have turned out differently. But instead, they continued to conduct business as usual, and now we will reap what they have sown.

Michael Snyder is a writer, speaker and activist who writes and edits his own blogs The American Dream and Economic Collapse Blog. Follow him on Twitter here.


(
activistpost.com)

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

+2
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
6/5/2016 3:36:56 PM

IS THE CIA GETTING READY TO DUMP THE CLINTONS?

How many times are the dynamic duo allowed to wander off the reservation?


Jon Rappoport | Infowars.com -
JUNE 3, 2016


Mainstream press outlets are mounting a new brand of coverage on Hillary Clinton’s campaign. They’re questioning her ability to win the nomination and/or the general election. All of a sudden, the done deal is not done.

What’s behind this switch?

Aside from fear of The Donald, there is the boiling Hillary email scandal. There is also the specter of further revelations about the syndicate known as the Clinton Foundation. That’s a big one. A very big one.

As I’ve previously reported, the sale of 20% of the uranium in the US to Putin—that’s right—involved donors to the Foundation—unreported donors—as well as the participation of Mrs. Clinton’s State Department. Detailed by the NY Times, the scandal has lain there for several months like a poisoned meal, with the press afraid to touch it further.

Now, enter a financial analyst named Charles Ortel. Ortel made a name for himself by publishing his analysis of serious problems in General Electric’s financial reports (2008). On his website, he has begun taking apart the entire Clinton Foundation, brick by brick. Here is an explosive excerpt from his overview:

“In financial terms, the size of criminal activities directly involving the Clinton Foundation exceeds $2 billion—counting affiliated and indirect criminal activities, the size exceeds $50 billion. The geographic scope of these unprosecuted criminal activities touches all 50 U.S. states, the District of Columbia, and more than 100 foreign countries where Clinton Foundation entities operate or solicit donations.”

“Beginning late in 2008, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and others expanded efforts to cover up illegal operating and fundraising activities of the Clinton Foundation since inception. Working ultimately with individuals inside the I.R.S. and elsewhere, these persons led efforts to ‘restructure’ the Clinton Foundation to make it appear that it had been legally constituted and validly operated in compliance with applicable laws, when this was certainly not the case.”

“Trustees and other persons have been engaged in an unprosecuted criminal conspiracy to operate the Clinton Foundation in the guise of a public charity, when it is, instead, an illegal money-laundering and influence peddling scheme.”

“In fact, the Clinton Foundation has engaged in widespread unauthorized activities, including illegal operations internationally and in the U.S., and illegal fundraising across state and national boundaries, using telephones, mail, and the internet.”

“Moreover, the Clinton Foundation has never validly been authorized by the I.R.S. to pursue tax-exempt purposes other than serving as an archival records repository and research facility in Little Rock, Arkansas.”

“Instead of concentrating upon its specifically-authorized tax-exempt purposes, trustees performed lax oversight and installed ineffective controls, creating conditions where Bill Clinton, Ira Magaziner, and others deliberately and illegally diverted substantial sums from the Clinton Foundation and its affiliates.”

In light of Ortel’s analysis, to say the Clintons have wandered off the reservation would be a vast understatement.

So…how have they remained free of this tsunami of a scandal? Who has been protecting them?

Let us return to the period when Bill Clinton was the Governor of Arkansas—and a 1995 book titled Compromised, by Terry Reed (former CIA asset) and John Cummings (former Newsday reporter).

Buckle up.

According to the authors, Bill Clinton was involved with the CIA in some very dirty dealings in Arkansas—and I’m not just talking about the cocaine flights landing at the Mena airport.

It seems Bill had agreed to set up secret CIA weapons-making factories in his home state, under the radar. But because Arkansas, when it comes to money, is all cronies all the time, everybody and his brother found out about the operation and wanted in. Also, Bill was looking for a bigger cut of the action.

This security breach infuriated the CIA, and a meeting was held to dress down Bill and make him see the error of his ways. His CIA handlers told him they were going to shut down the whole weapons operation, because Bill had screwed up royally. A screaming match ensued—but the CIA people backed off a bit and told Bill he was still “their man” for the upcoming 1992 run for the Presidency.

Of course, there are people who think Reed and Cumming’s book contains fiction, but John Cummings was a top-notch reporter for Newsday. He co-authored the 1990 book, Goombata, about the rise and fall of John Gotti. He exposed US operations to destroy Cuban agriculture with bio-weapons. It’s highly doubtful he would have put his name onCompromisedwithout a deep conviction he was correctly adding up the facts.

Here, from Compromised, is an account of the extraordinary meeting, in Arkansas, between Bill Clinton and his CIA handlers, in March of 1986, six years before Clinton would run for the Presidency. Author Terry Reed, himself a CIA asset at the time, was there. According to the authors, so was Oliver North, and a man named “Robert Johnson,” who was representing CIA head Bill Casey.

Johnson said to Bill Clinton:

“Calm down and listen….We are all in this together…I’m not here to threaten you [Bill]. But there have been mistakes. Bill, you are Mr. Casey’s fair-haired boy. But you do have competition for the job you seek [the US Presidency]. We would never put all eggs in one basket. You and your state have been our greatest asset…Mr. Casey wanted me to pass on to you that unless you **** up and do something stupid, you’re No. 1 on the short list for a shot at the job you’ve always wanted.

“That’s pretty heady stuff, Bill. So why don’t you help us keep a lid on this [CIA weapons-manufacturing] and we’ll all be promoted together. You and guys like us are the fathers of the new government. Hell, we are the new covenant.”

By this account, Bill Clinton was the CIA’s boy back in 1986, long before he launched himself into his first Presidential campaign.

He was their boy, and they protected him, despite the fact that he had wandered off the reservation.

But now, it’s happening again. It appears Bill and his wife have taken their massive Foundation to new heights of careless, reckless, devil-may-care criminality.

Well, the Clintons are that way, aren’t they? They don’t just push the boundaries of what is legal and moral, they drive a huge tank through the boundaries and shout WHO CARES as they hurtle off to commit new and slimier deeds.

The question is, will the CIA still give this duo cover? Or will Agency insiders throw in the towel and leave them out in the cold?

Has that decision to abandon them already been made? Is that why the CIA Mockingbird press is starting to turn on Hillary?

Have she and Bill gone too far?

Is John Kerry lurching into his polished loafers and getting ready to step into the breach as the Democratic nominee for President?

Jon Rappoport

This article first appeared at NoMoreFakeNews.com.


(Infowars)

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

+2
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
6/5/2016 3:49:08 PM

What Are They Hiding? Govt Wants To Keep 9/11 Cockpit Audio Secret During Gitmo Trial

JUNE 3, 2016


By Matt Agorist

So far, 2016 is proving to be the year the September 11th attacks have been blown wide open. But when the U.S. Government is involved, it’s one step forward, then two steps back.

For the first time since that fateful September day, a once oblivious populace has begun to question why the US invaded Iraq in spite of the fact that 15 of the 19 alleged hijackers were from Saudi Arabia.

Then, in an April episode of 60 Minutes, former Florida governor, Democratic U.S. Senator and onetime chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Bob Graham implicated a US ally for their role in the September 11th attacks.

“I think it’s implausible to believe that 19 people, most of whom didn’t speak English, most of whom had never been in the United States before, many didn’t have a high school education, could have carried out such a complicated task without some support from within the United States,” said Graham in the interview, implicating Saudi Arabia for their role in 9/11.

Graham mentioned that a redacted portion of the 9/11 investigation, now popularly known as the 28 pages, implicates the Saudi Kingdom in aiding the attackers.

Just when it seemed that Americans were finally going to get a glimpse into the facts of what really happened on 9/11, Saudi Arabia threatened the US with the collapse of the dollar if they released the 28 pages.

Predictably, Obama caved to the Saudis.

Ah, but there was another glimmer of hope after the U.S. Senate’s unanimous passage of the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA), which allowed the families of victims of 9/11 to sue the Saudi government in federal court.

Last week, after the victims’ families had their hopes built up by the passage of JASTA, it was revealed that the bill’s co-sponsor Chuck Schumer slipped in a last-minute loophole, effectively castrating the entire bill.

While JASTA would allow for families of victims of 9/11 to overcome the current restrictions, the new section of the bill would essentially allow the heads of the Justice and State departments to stay any lawsuits indefinitely. The provision allows for the organizational heads to simply “inform the judge hearing the case that the US government has engaged with Riyadh in diplomatic talks to resolve the issue” — indefinitely.

As if rendering JASTA irrelevant wasn’t enough, this week, a U.S. government prosecutor, Ed Ryan, announced that a military court is being asked to withhold from the public a cockpit recording from a hijacked jet in the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, because it contains evidence needed for upcoming trials. Joanne Stocker, reporting for Sputnik News in Guantanamo Bay explains:

“[The voice recording] has significant events for the purposes of the government’s case-in-chief,” Ryan told Judge James Pohl. “It proves hijacking in the first place. It proves intent. It proves the initial murders of the crew in the cockpit — the sounds of which can be heard — and, at the end, it contains the attempts to retake the airliner.”

The recording is from United Airlines Flight 93, which crashed in a field in Pennsylvania before reaching its intended target. Flight 93’s recording is unique as it is the only one which survived the September 11 attacks.

The recording allegedly captured passengers taking back over the plane from the hijackers before the plane crashed.

According to Sputnik, Ryan stated that the prosecution plans to play the audio at upcoming trials of suspects detained at the Guantanamo Bay prison.

He explained that the protective order must be in place before the US government can turn the audio over to lawyers who are defending terrorist suspects, including alleged mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

Keeping the recording a secret is a kick in the teeth for the families who lost their loved ones on that day, especially the ones on Flight 93. It is also entirely unnecessary. The ones who are allegedly on trial are in Gitmo, and American citizens listening to that audio would have zero impact on the outcome of these hearings.

The court’s keeping this audio secret is just another reason American citizens, and the victims’ families in particular, have no reason to trust their government any longer.

Matt Agorist is the co-founder of TheFreeThoughtProject.com, where this article first appeared. He is an honorably discharged veteran of the USMC and former intelligence operator directly tasked by the NSA. This prior experience gives him unique insight into the world of government corruption and the American police state. Agorist has been an independent journalist for over a decade and has been featured on mainstream networks around the world. .


(activistpost.com)


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

+2
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
6/5/2016 4:03:04 PM

IS IT ETHICAL TO GROW HUMAN ORGANS IN PIGS?

BY ON 6/4/16 AT 3:00 PM

Pigs in a village near Warsaw on April 10, 2014. The author writes that one of the dangers of using pigs to host human organs is that if human stem cells grew into ovaries and testes, it might be possible for human-pig chimeras to mate and possibly give birth to a human child.
KACPER PEMPEL/REUTERS

More than 120,000 Americans are currently on waiting lists for lifesaving organ transplants. Every day some 22 of them die before they can receive a transplant.

Wouldn't it be great if organs precisely matched to their recipients could be grown inside domesticated animals, such as pigs or sheep?

Scientists are trying to achieve just this goal, but some ethicists are opposed to the research.

At Stanford University, stem cell researcher Hiromitsu Nakauchi has made some significant steps toward growing human organs inside of animals. As a proof of principle experiment, he grew a rat pancreas in a mouse. He did this by disabling the gene for generating a pancreas in a mouse embryo, then injecting the embryo with stem cells from rats. The rat stem cells took up this vacated "organ niche" and differentiated into fully functioning pancreases.

Such cross-species mixtures are called chimeras, after the creature from Greek mythology that was part lion, part goat and part serpent. Nakauchi also successfully used this method to grow a functioning pancreas in a pig using stem cells from a genetically different pig.

Nakauchi is now working with Pablo Ross, a developmental biologist at the University of California, Davis, to create human-pig and human-sheep embryos to see if the technique can produce human organs. The genes for generating specific organs are disabled, and human induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) are injected into pig and sheep embryos. Induced pluripotent stem cells are adult cells that have been genetically reprogrammed to an embryonic stem-cell-like state. Once reprogrammed, iPSCs can grow into different types of cells and tissues. For example, reprogrammed skin cells would be able to differentiate into liver cells or heart cells.

Once the human-pig and human-sheep chimeric embryos are created, they are installed in the wombs of pigs and sheep, where they are allowed to gestate for 28 days before being removed for examination. Normal gestation is 114 days for pigs and 152 for sheep. For now, they stop short of full gestation in an effort to avoid ethical controversy.

Last year, the National Institutes of Health imposed a moratorium on funding any research in which human pluripotent cells are introduced into nonhuman animal embryos. But why would anyone object to this potentially lifesaving research?

"You're getting into unsettling ground that I think is damaging to our sense of humanity," the New York Medical College biologist Stuart Newman told NPR last week. Sufficiently unsettling, in fact, that some U.S. senators tried to outlaw human-animal chimera research back in 2009.

In the same NPR report, Jason Robert, a bioethicist at Arizona State University, said, "One of the concerns that a lot of people have is that there's something sacrosanct about what it means to be human expressed in our DNA."

He added that some people might consider that inserting human DNA into "other animals and giving those other animals potentially some of the capacities of humans that this could be a kind of violation—a kind of, maybe, even playing God."

One issue that worries folks like Newman and Robert is the possibility that human stem cells, instead of growing into transplantable hearts, kidneys or livers, might migrate to the brains of animals or to their reproductive organs. Would human neurons in the brains of pigs generate something like human consciousness?

It is worth noting that mice, into which glial cells obtained from donated human fetuses were injected into their brains when they were pups, learned much faster to fear a sound associated with a mild electric shock than did their normal confreres. But while the human brain cells boosted the efficiency of mouse neural networks, they did not confer any specifically human qualities on the mice.

When worrying about the migration of human stem cells into the brains of animal embryos, it is also important to keep in mind that pig brains are only about an eighth the size of humans and those of sheep about a 10th the size. (As for other animals, I should note that the National Academy of Sciences issued guidelines in 2010 urging researchers not to inject human stem cells into nonhuman primates at any stage of embryonic or postnatal development.)

Another concern: If human stem cells grew into ovaries and testes, it might be possible for human-pig chimeras to mate and possibly give birth to a human child. The simplest way to avoid this problem would be to make sure that any such chimeras never get close enough to one another to breed.

Ultimately, concerns about humanizing animal brains or reproductive organs will be precluded if Nakauchi's hypothesis is further confirmed that human stem cells confine themselves to occupying and proliferating only in organ niches made vacant by experimenters. Other researchers note it is possible to avoid the issue entirely by disabling genes in human stem cells that could give rise to neurons or reproductive cells.

Are such experiments really somehow inherently "damaging to our sense of humanity" or in violation of "something sacrosanct"? Nonsense. To make such claims is to confuse human organs and human DNA with human beings. A heart or liver is not a person, whether or not it is grown in a pig. And Human DNA is just the instructions on how to make a human body; it isn't a human body or brain.

To people worried that growing human organs animals somehow violates human dignity, bioethicist David Shaw asked the right question: "Is it dignified to let people suffer and die when we could use this new biotechnology to provide them with organs that will let them live long and happy lives?"

Ronald Bailey is a science correspondent at Reason magazine and author of The End of Doom.

(Newsweek)

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

+2


facebook
Like us on Facebook!