2012: 千萬不要看, 如果你不信有UFO

UFO Video Compilation 2005-2011 AMAZING FOOTAGE! Real or Fake? It doesn’t get any better than this!

新世界秩序: 紐約警察局開始對犯罪嫌疑使用虹膜掃描

The New York Police Department Starts Using Iris Scans on Suspects

In a move questioned by the New York Civil Liberties Union and some of New York’s top lawyers, the New York Police Department is now using machines to photograph and scan the irises of prisoners as they pass through New York Central Booking. The department claims that this new high-tech identification program is part of a failsafe measure meant to prevent escapes as suspects move through New York’s complex and winding court system.

Individuals deeply concerned with civil liberties and privacy, like New York top lawyer David Perecman, are uneasy with new regime of personal data collection.

“The NYPD can now photograph the irises of suspects arrested for any reason and they implemented this without any legislative oversight or public discourse,” said David Perecman. “There are also no reports on how authorities plan to protect this collected biometric data from misuse.”

News of the initiative was first released late last week. Civil libertarians and privacy advocates say the collecting and storing of this data could “put innocent people under permanent suspicion.”
“This move by the NYPD is encroaching on civil liberties,” top New York lawyer Perecman said. “This type of data collecting is not authorized by any New York statute. Collecting fingerprints is specifically allowed. DNA evidence has had more legislative debate and its usage is only limited to certain types of cases.”

A legal review by the NYPD had determined that legislative authorization was not necessary despite the fact that the department’s collection of electronic data has been tainted with controversy as recently as this summer. The department was forced to stop electronic storage of names and addresses of people stopped under the stop-and-frisk program but not charged or arrested.

“A new state law was needed to stop the NYPD then, and that may be what we need again now,” concluded Perecman. “This new data collection has the potential to lead to some serious violations of civil liberties.
Source: 24-7 PR

新世界秩序：核軍備競賽繼續在勞倫斯·利弗莫爾實驗室和基地300當臥底

Nuclear Arms Race Continues Undercover at Lawrence Livermore Lab and Site 300

YouTube -- AbbyMediaRoots

Abby and Robbie Martin grew up in Pleasanton, CA, a city located ten miles from the Lawrence Livermore National Lab (LLNL), a secret nuclear weapons production facility. They initially set out to explore the psychological impacts of taking nuclear testing into virtual space. But as their investigation unfolded, they found that the LLNL—in conjunction with Site 300—have built an impressive greenwashing PR campaign cloaking a dark reality.

新世界秩序: 奧巴馬新行政命令抓住公民來作美國軍事準備的基礎設施

Dees Illustration

New Obama Executive Order Seizes U.S. Infrastructure and Citizens for Military Preparedness

Brandon Turbeville

Activist Post

In a stunning move, on March 16, 2012, Barack Obama signed an Executive Order stating that the President and his specifically designated Secretaries now have the authority to commandeer all domestic U.S. resources including food and water. The EO also states that the President and his Secretaries have the authority to seize all transportation, energy, and infrastructure inside the United States as well as forcibly induct/draft American citizens into the military. The EO also contains a vague reference in regards to harnessing American citizens to fulfill “labor requirements” for the purposes of national defense.


Not only that, but the authority claimed inside the EO does not only apply to National Emergencies and times of war. It also applies in peacetime.


The National Defense Resources Preparedness Executive Order exploits the “authority” granted to the President in the Defense Production Act of 1950 in order to assert that virtually every means of human survival is now available for confiscation and control by the President via his and his Secretaries’ whim.


The unconstitutionality of the overwhelming majority of Executive Orders is well established, as well as the illegality of denying citizens their basic Constitutional and human rights, even in the event of a legitimate national emergency. Likewise, it should also be pointed out that, like Obama’s recent Libyan adventure and the foregone conclusion of a Syrian intervention, there is no mention of Congress beyond a minor role of keeping the allegedly co-equal branch of government informed on contextually meaningless developments.

As was mentioned above, the scope of the EO is virtually all-encompassing. For instance, in “Section 201 – Priorities and Allocations Authorities,” the EO explains that the authority for the actions described in the opening paragraph rests with the President but is now delegated to the various Secretaries of the U.S. Federal Government. The list of delegations and the responsibility of the Secretaries as provided in this section are as follows:

(1) the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to food resources, food resource facilities, livestock resources, veterinary resources, plant health resources, and the domestic distribution of farm equipment and commercial fertilizer;

(2) the Secretary of Energy with respect to all forms of energy;

(3) the Secretary of Health and Human Services with respect to health resources;

(4) the Secretary of Transportation with respect to all forms of civil transportation;

(5) the Secretary of Defense with respect to water resources; and

(6) the Secretary of Commerce with respect to all other materials, services, and facilities, including construction materials.

One need only to read the “Definitions” section of the EO in order to clearly see that terms such as “food resources” is an umbrella that includes literally every form of food and food-related product that could in any way be beneficial to human survival.

陰謀論: 新研究指所有紅肉都對你有害

All red meat is bad for you, new study says

By Eryn Brown
Los Angeles Times

Eating red meat — any amount and any type — appears to significantly increase the risk of premature death, according to a long-range study that examined the eating habits and health of more than 110,000 adults for more than 20 years.
For instance, adding just one 3-ounce serving of unprocessed red meat — picture a piece of steak no bigger than a deck of cards — to one’s daily diet was associated with a 13% greater chance of dying during the course of the study.
Even worse, adding an extra daily serving of processed red meat, such as a hot dog or two slices of bacon, was linked to a 20% higher risk of death during the study.
“Any red meat you eat contributes to the risk,” said An Pan, a postdoctoral fellow at the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston and lead author of the study, published onlineMonday in the Archives of Internal Medicine.
Crunching data from thousands of questionnaires that asked people how frequently they ate a variety of foods, the researchers also discovered that replacing red meat with other foods seemed to reduce mortality risk for study participants.
Eating a serving of nuts instead of beef or pork was associated with a 19% lower risk of dying during the study. The team said choosing poultry or whole grains as a substitute was linked with a 14% reduction in mortality risk; low-fat dairy or legumes, 10%; and fish, 7%.
Previous studies had associated red meat consumption withdiabetes, heart disease and cancer, all of which can be fatal. Scientists aren’t sure exactly what makes red meat so dangerous, but the suspects include the iron and saturated fat in beef, pork and lamb, the nitrates used to preserve them, and the chemicals created by high-temperature cooking.
The Harvard researchers hypothesized that eating red meat would also be linked to an overall risk of death from any cause, Pan said. And the results suggest they were right: Among the 37,698 men and 83,644 women who were tracked, as meat consumption increased, so did mortality risk.
In separate analyses of processed and unprocessed meats, the group found that both types appear to hasten death. Pan said that at the outset, he and his colleagues had thought it likely that only processed meat posed a health danger.
Carol Koprowski, a professor of preventive medicine at USC’s Keck School of Medicine who wasn’t involved in the research, cautioned that it can be hard to draw specific conclusions from a study like this because there can be a lot of error in the way diet information is recorded in food frequency questionnaires, which ask subjects to remember past meals in sometimes grueling detail.
But Pan said the bottom line was that there was no amount of red meat that’s good for you.
“If you want to eat red meat, eat the unprocessed products, and reduce it to two or three servings a week,” he said. “That would have a huge impact on public health.”
A majority of people in the study reported that they ate an average of at least one serving of meat per day.
Pan said that he eats one or two servings of red meat per week, and that he doesn’t eat bacon or other processed meats.
Read More Here