Thursday, September 24, 2009

Michael Moore Told to 'Cool It' on Senator Dodd

"Filmmaker Michael Moore calls out Senator Chris Dodd in his latest documentary, Capitalism: A Love Story, for receiving corrupt sweetheart loans from Countrywide Financial. Moore discloses a recent phone call he received from a "well known, well connected" person around the Democratic Party to "cool it" on the senator from Connecticut.


Who are we and why do we behave the way that we do? Writer, director and producer Michael Moore has been trying to answer that question his entire film making career. His latest film, Capitalism: A Love Story, investigates the powerful forces behind the calamitous predicament in which countless Americans are finding themselves: losing their homes, jobs and savings to foot the bill for past spending.

What is the price that America - and the rest of the world - pays for its love of capitalism?

From Middle America to the halls of power in Washington to the global financial epicenter in Manhattan, Moore takes filmgoers into uncharted territory as he tries to get to the heart of the matter. - Commonwealth Club of California

Michael Moore is an Academy Award-winning American filmmaker, author and liberal political commentator. He is the director and producer of Bowling for Columbine, Fahrenheit 9/11, and Sicko, three of the top five highest-grossing documentaries of all time.

In September 2008, he released his first free movie on the Internet, Slacker Uprising, documenting his personal crusade to encourage more Americans to vote in presidential elections. He has also written and starred in the TV shows "TV Nation" and "The Awful Truth."

Moore is a self-described liberal who has criticized globalization, large corporations, assault weapon ownership, the Iraq War, U.S. President George W. Bush and the American health care system in his written and cinematic works. In 2005, Time magazine named him one of the world's 100 most influential people.

Also in 2005, Moore started the annual Traverse City Film Festival in Traverse City, Michigan. In 2008, he closed his Manhattan office and moved it to Traverse City, where he is working on his new film. "

Paul Wellstone Iraq War Speech

This is the speech that got him and those on the plane with him crashed.

Wednesday, September 23, 2009

Cong. Kucinich Questions Insurance Execs. on Denied Claims

Are health insurance companies generally being fair and honest when they reject claims from policy holders?

That would seem to be an important question in deciding how best to fix the U.S. health system. But it hasn't been a focus of the raging health-care debate -- possibly because the answer is not publicly available.

This is one of the dark corners of the black box that is private health insurance, said Karen Pollitz, a professor at the Georgetown University Health Policy Institute.

Saturday, September 05, 2009

Genetically Modified Soy and Me

I'm lucky.  Soy foods made me sick early in the process of shifting from meat/fish to vegetarian.  It took me a few months to figure out what the problem was, trial and error.  It manifested as what felt like my already weak thyroid died.  I feel much healthier without soy than with. Some folks just have an allergy to soy and I'm on that list. 

Turns out folk like me are canaries in the coal mines.

Monsanto controls 91% of the soy market and holds patents on the genetically modified seeds.

Here’s Monsanto’s page on soy that shows how they are selling us this formerly industrial material crop.
“The best available evidence, accumulated over the last 25 years, indicates soy's ability to lower cholesterol. Studies show that eating as little as 47g (about 1.5 oz.) of soy can lower total cholesterol levels an average of 9% and low density lipoprotein (LDL) 13%. A 1% drop in total cholesterol translates into a 2% drop in the risk of developing heart disease. According to the American Heart Association, recent studies suggest that the isoflavones (also referred to as phytoestrogens) present in soybeans may contribute to cholesterol lowering and other positive cardiovascular effects. For example, incidence of certain chronic heart conditions and diseases are significantly lower in populations, such as the Japanese, that consume large quantities of foods known to contain isoflavones.”

A cute site on the history of soy (soy was promoted around the same time hemp was prohibited):

Here’s some other soy research, though probably not approved of by Monsanto:

"Most people remain unaware that soy is known to contain an array of potent chemical toxins. The modern manufacturing processes of high-profit industries make no effort to remove these potent toxins. High levels of phytic acid, trypsin inhibitors, toxic lysinoalanine and highly carcinogenic nitrosamines are all present in soy products.

Phytoestrogens that disrupt endocrine function and are potent antithyroid agents are present in vast quantities in soy, including the potentially devastating isoflavone Genistein. Infants exclusively fed soy-based formula have 13,000 to 22,000 times more estrogen compounds in their blood than babies fed milk-based formula, the estrogenic equivalent of at least five birth control pills per day. Premature development of girls has been linked to the use of soy formula, as has the underdevelopment of males. Infant soy formula has been linked to autoimmune thyroid disease.

Soy is linked to infertility, breast cancer, hypothyroidism, thyroid cancer, and many other disorders.”

Two other good articles on Monsanto's genetically modified foods:

From Vanity Fair

" Monsanto’s Harvest of Fear

Monsanto already dominates America’s food chain with its genetically modified seeds. Now it has targeted milk production. Just as frightening as the corporation’s tactics–ruthless legal battles against small farmers–is its decades-long history of toxic contamination."

Another good page is on Global :

“Monsanto Whistleblower Says Genetically Engineered Crops May Cause Disease

by Jeffrey M. Smith

It turns out that the damage done to DNA due to the process of creating a genetically modified organism is far more extensive than previously thought.[1] GM crops routinely create unintended proteins, alter existing protein levels or even change the components and shape of the protein that is created by the inserted gene. Kirk’s (Azevedo - whistleblower) concerns about a GM crop producing a harmful misfolded protein remain well-founded, and have been echoed by scientists as one of the many possible dangers that are not being evaluated by the biotech industry’s superficial safety assessments.

GM cotton has provided ample reports of unpredicted side-effects. In April 2006, more than 70 Indian shepherds reported that 25% of their herds died within 5-7 days of continuous grazing on Bt cotton plants.[2] Hundreds of Indian agricultural laborers reported allergic reactions from Bt cotton. Some cotton harvesters have been hospitalized and many laborers in cotton gin factories take antihistamines each day before work.[3]”

(Above is a lecture by Jeffrey Smith, in which he summarizes the contents of his book, The Health Dangers of Genetically Modified Foods. It's not only informative, but amusing, because he casts a joke here and there.) 

Dr. Mercola’s article on soy is also chilling.
“Newest Research On Why You Should Avoid Soy … by Sally Fallon & Mary G. Enig, Ph.D.

Cinderella's Dark Side

The propaganda that has created the soy sales miracle is all the more remarkable because, only a few decades ago, the soybean was considered unfit to eat - even in Asia. During the Chou Dynasty (1134-246 BC) the soybean was designated one of the five sacred grains, along with barley, wheat, millet and rice.

However, the pictograph for the soybean, which dates from earlier times, indicates that it was not first used as a food; for whereas the pictographs for the other four grains show the seed and stem structure of the plant, the pictograph for the soybean emphasizes the root structure. Agricultural literature of the period speaks frequently of the soybean and its use in crop rotation. Apparently the soy plant was initially used as a method of fixing nitrogen."

Fixing the problem requires an honesty vs. greed based strategy to restore nature, if possible. The FDA should restore the family farm with natural, NON GENETICALLY MODIFIED HEMP SEEDS and use the hemp plant to help us solve our problems now.

For more on hemp please visit the USA Hemp Museum. Stop by the museum’s Economics, Agriculture and Foods rooms.

If washing out the toxins can help, consider THE WATER CURE

The Water Cure: An interview with Dr. Batmanghelidj

Wednesday, September 02, 2009

Loose Change 2nd Edition (Full)

9/11 was an inside job, 101.

If you only see one piece on the subject, it's Loose Change , 2nd Edition.

Really, torture, murder, constitutional rape, war for oil, wrecked economy, etc., motive, opportunity and beneficiary.

Don't be afraid to think about truth then demand the rest of the truth and justice.

Cell Phones & Wi-Fi Dangers Are Real

Talk about the need for change. By rubberstamping wireless technology without adequate testing, we have been legislated to death, officially.

Superstar attorney Johnnie Cochran’s doctor, Dr. Keith Black, said publically that he believes Cochran's death was caused by his cell phone use in an interview with CNN in 2005 as reported on EMF Facts:

"BLACK: My own belief is that there probably is a correlation between the use of cell phones and brain cancer, even though there’s no scientific proof.
GUPTA: Dr. Black, who’s the head of neurosurgery at Cedar Sinai Medical Center, believes one day science will catch up to what he’s already seeing with his own patients.
BLACK: We know that people that use cell phones a lot also complain of headaches, difficulty with concentration, with memory. You know, this is a microwave antenna, so you’re essentially cooking the brain when you hold the receiver right next to your brain."

The City of San Francisco asked a PhD. in Canada for the real deal regarding the health risks associated with cell phones and Wi-Fi. The report is dated May 29, 2007.

Unlike the vast majority of available research on the subject of cancer and wireless technology, it was not financed and approved by the wireless technology industry.

If you use a cell phone or Wi-Fi please read the report referenced, excerpts below.

Magda Havas, B.Sc., Ph.D.
Environmental & Resource Studies
Phone: (705) 748-1011 ext. 7882, FAX: (705) 748-1569, e-mail
Date: May 29, 2007
To: Board of Supervisors, City and County of San Francisco
Regarding: Case No. 2007.0097E
San Francisco Citywide Wireless Broadband Internet Access Network

Analysis of Health and Environmental Effects of Proposed
San Francisco Earthlink Wi-Fi Network


Laboratory studies of radio frequency radiation as well as epidemiological studies of people who live near cell phone antennas and/or use wireless technology indicate adverse biological effects.
These effects include increase in cancers, DNA breaks, impaired reproduction, increased
permeability of the blood-brain barrier, altered calcium flux, changes in enzyme activity,
neurological disorders, altered brainwave activity, insomnia, decreased memory, inattention,
slower reaction time, tinnitus, dizziness, skin disorders, headaches, chronic pain, chronic fatigue, respiratory problems and arrhythmia. A growing population is becoming sensitive to
electromagnetic energy and some of these people are affected by radio frequency radiation and are unable to live near antennas. Animals that live near cell phone and broadcast antennas are also affected by RF radiation, which manifests itself in reproductive impairment and behavioral abnormalities.

The cancers and symptoms of EHS occur at levels well below the FCC guidelines for radio
frequency radiation. These guidelines are based on short-term (6-minute) thermal effects and are inadequate to protect the population from long-term, non-thermal exposure. The FCC guidelines conform to ICNIRP guidelines (15) but are much higher (i.e. less protective) than guidelines in other countries.

Metal objects such as wiring in the home, fences, poles, roofs, filing cabinets can redirect RFR and create hot spots or interfere with reception. For this reason calculations of exposure may not be as reliable as actually measurements. Appeals and resolutions from physicians and scientist request governments to provide the strictest guidelines for RF exposure and address the growing number of people developing a sensitivity to this form of energy.


The Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco should adopt the
precautionary principle in their decision regarding the Earthlink Wi-Fi Network. The scientific
evidence indicates that exposure to radio frequency radiation near cell phone antennas and in laboratory studies is associated with and/or causes adverse biological and health effects at levels well below federal guidelines and at levels to which people who use wireless computers are likely to be exposed. Policy makers and the public should heed the warning that this form of energy, at current exposures, is far from benign and should act accordingly to protect human health and the environment.

Since cumulative radio frequency exposures are unknown from currently operating antennas and towers, a baseline analysis is important to determine what these current exposure conditions are at present. This should be done prior to approval of a Wi-Fi system. An exposure assessment should be done in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines to determine that there are no health risks. San Francisco EarthLink Wi-Fi Network, 2007 page 21/51

Blanketing San Francisco with yet another source of radio frequency radiation in addition to the existing cell phone, broadcast, and essential police, fire, ambulance communication antennas is likely to result in a growing number of people becoming ill.

Those who have to make decisions about where antennas should be placed are seldom provided with all the facts. Often they are given conflicting information and side with the industry because they don’t want to stand in the way of “progress.” The oath of office that most public officials take requires protecting public health and may require swimming against the tide in order to do what is right.

The Board of Supervisors will be shown studies that document no adverse effects of this
technology and they will be told the scientific evidence in contradictory and inconclusive. The underlying assumption is that until science can prove this form of energy is harmful, until scientists understand the mechanisms involved, until every study shows the same thing, we should allow human exposure. That approach could be tantamount to the costly history lesson of smoking and lung cancer; asbestos exposure and mesothelioma; DDT and loss of bird populations.

Science does not have all the answers and the understanding of mechanism is incomplete.
However, according to the Precautionary Principle “threats of serious or irreversible damage” is all that is needed to act.

Search This Blog