Category: Elite / NWO Agenda


 Thereby uniting us all, mainstream and alternative alike , ending the current corrupt system,  Introducing the idealism of a kinder gentler New World Order……For our own good of course!

Skeptical ?

Two Words….Al Gore,

Think about it.

 

~ Desert Rose ~

***************************************************************************

Agenda 21 Redistributes Wealth Through Stealth

Julie Beal
Activist Post

I’ve got a very important story to tell, so listen closely. Fed a diet of ‘alternative reactions to the mainstream news’, you probably won’t know about any of this, because it’s not had much of a public airing. The final push of Agenda 21 is to unite us all, mainstream and alternative alike – an end to the current system, and the institution of the ‘fair sounding’ new world order: green and caring.

There have been several attempts to co-opt the Occupy movement to advance this agenda, which is neither green nor caring. In fact, it intends to exploit nature and people to the fullest extent.

We need to expose this agenda. Otherwise, the next time you’re out on the street protesting, you’ll be accosted by a Happiness Angel, who just wants to make you better, so that we can all be happy……

These are the elements of my story:

1. The New Economics (especially George Soros) – natural capital + complexity
2. The UN’s cult of happiness, which includes the responsibility to make everyone else happy, and to live ‘sustainably’.
3. Identity providers ……….. trust facilitators
4. Mobile finance
5. Mobile everything – TELEHEALTH – electronic records
6. Quantified self / BIOSTAMP – transhumanism ……… metrics for social and human capital
7. Global to local currencies, all track-able.
8. The science of complex adaptive systems (CAS) eg Purdue’s social simulation…….analysis/control
9. Narrative science / controlling the conversation eg ‘Hollywood, Health and Society’……memes/ nudging
10. Communitarianism / Agenda 21……….ideology, the global zeitgeist

Read Full Article Here

About these ads

China: H7N9 Outbreak to Potentially Become Deadliest in History with Over 20% Mortality Rate

KUNMING, CHINA - APRIL 10: (CHINA OUT) A technician conducts tests for the H7N9 bird flu virus at the Kunming Center for Disease Control (CDC) on April 10, 2013 in Kunming, China. As of yesterday, China has confirmed five new cases of H7N9 in Shaoxing, Jiangsu and Shanghai. So far, China has reported 33 H7N9 bird flu cases, including nine deaths. (Photo by ChinaFotoPress/Getty Images)

KUNMING, CHINA – APRIL 10: (CHINA OUT) A technician conducts tests for the H7N9 bird flu virus at the Kunming Center for Disease Control (CDC) on April 10, 2013 in Kunming, China. As of yesterday, China has confirmed five new cases of H7N9 in Shaoxing, Jiangsu and Shanghai. So far, China has reported 33 H7N9 bird flu cases, including nine deaths. (Photo by ChinaFotoPress/Getty Images)

OpEd

by Shepard Ambellas
Intellihub.com

April 26, 2013

BEIJING — As of Thursday 109 people have been confirmed to be dead from the H7N9 virus which emerged rather quickly this April after the typical flu season.

Human-to-human transmission has not yet been documented. However, reports from the World Health Organization state that 40% of the victims did not have contact with any type of poultry raising concern amongst the medical community.

Even more alarming is the fact that the virus has over a 20% mortality rate right out of the gate. If this proves to continue, we could possibly be looking at one of the most deadly viral outbreaks of all time. This is backed up by others such as journalist, Patrick Di Justo, who wrote, “As of today, dividing the number of confirmed cases by the number of deaths makes it look as though H7N9 is an especially bad flu, with a twenty-per-cent mortality rate. If true, this would be terrifying: the 1918 Spanish Flu, which has been called one of the deadliest plagues in human history, also had a mortality rate of around two percent.”

Some are equating the recent H7N9 outbreak to the 2009 H1N1 swine flu, which proved to be a money maker for vaccine manufactures worldwide while also paving the way for fast-tract vaccination manufacturing with no accountability. This was all achieved through WHO regulation, policy and international treaties which essentially supersede US law in most cases allowing vaccine manufactures to rake in immense profits while adding any ingredients to their cocktails they wish. Once again putting taxpayer dollars into the pockets of select private corporations.

Now in 2013 with the newly emerging H7N9, we see the same pattern as it has been reported that, “For now, the C.D.C. is working with pharmaceutical manufacturers to reverse-engineer H7N9 in order to help develop a potential open-source (i.e. freely shared ) vaccine, if a special vaccine becomes necessary.”

Once again we see the rhetoric, pre-positioning of assets, information, propaganda and advise, all working in conjunction to give the world the perfect Problem, Reaction and Solution.

Read  Full Article Here

********************************************************************************************************

Leading scientists urge President Obama’s advisers to investigate ethical issues raised by creating highly infectious strain of bird-flu

Virus could easily be transmitted between people

Health officials carry sacks of culled chickens after bird flu was found at a farm in Agartala, India
1 / 1

A group of leading scientists has urged President Obama’s advisers to investigate the ethical issues raised by a decision to create a highly infectious strain of bird-flu virus that could be transmitted easily between people.

The scientists, who include a former UK Government chief scientist and a Nobel laureate, said that it is “morally and ethically wrong” to create a new type of influenza virus in the laboratory that is more lethal and transmissible than what actually exists in nature.

Two teams of flu researchers – led by Ron Fouchier of the Erasmus Medical Centre in Rotterdam and Yoshihiro Kawaoka of the University of Wisconsin-Madison – announced in 2011 that they had succeeded in mutating the H5N1 avian virus so that it could in theory be transmitted through the air between people.

They stopped the research last year as part of a wider voluntary moratorium following public outrage over the work. But they announced an end to the moratorium earlier this year, and even an expansion into new areas involving other viruses and diseases.

In a strongly-worded letter sent to the US Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues, opponents of the research warned that there has not been enough debate over the threats posed by lifting the moratorium on increasing the transmissibility of highly lethal viruses such as the H5N1 strain of bird-flu.

They said that the 60 per cent mortality rate of the H5N1 virus – on the relatively rare occasions that it has infected humans – puts it in a “class of its own” and that attempting to make it more transmissible through laboratory experiments is tantamount to risking a devastatingly deadly flu pandemic.

Read  Full Article Here

 

**********************************************************************************************************

 

Japan prepares countermeasures against new H7N9 bird flu virus

Posted on April 24, 2013 by Ida Torres in Features, National with No Comments

Japan prepares countermeasures against new H7N9 bird flu virus

The Japanese government will be introducing countermeasures in case an outbreak of the new strain of the bird flu virus, H7N9, reaches Japanese shores. The health ministry panel has listed down several measures, including granting the prefectural governor the authority to endorse for hospitalization the suspected patients and to impose work restrictions in case of an outbreak.

The virus, which has killed 21 and infected around 104 people in China, has not materialized yet on Japanese shores, but the threat and possibility is always there, especially now that they suspect it has the potential to spread to and through mammals, including people. The Health, Labor and Welfare Ministry will be introducing the new measures by early May and they will also be revising some government ordinances under the Infectious Disease Law and the Quarantine Law. Under the new measures, patients who work in the hospitality or food industries are required to not go in or else risk getting punished if they refuse to comply.

 

Read Full Article Here

 

**********************************************************************************************************

Related articles

***********************************************************************************************************

April 21, 2013

An Australian analysis of H7N9

Epidemiological Curve and Mortality Rate

What would most concern the relevant authorities is the very high mortality rate in the first weeks and months of the outbreak.

Currently there are 102 laboratory confirmed cases including 20 confirmed fatalities, a mortality rate of 19.6%. For context the mortality rate of SARS was 9.6%.

9 persons (8.8%) are known to have recovered and have been discharged from hospital or treatment.

The most recent fatality via Xinhua was on the 21st April.

Here is an infographic looking at those hospitalised, confirmed fatalities and patients that have had confirmed recoveries. At the suggestion of @vanebobadilla I’ve also included breakdowns by sex using the most current available data (see embedded notes for details).

H7n9_infographic

*********************************************************************************************************
  • Merkel and Tusk held a brief debate on Europe after her biography was launched (Photo: Polish Prime Minister’s office/Maciej Śmiarowski)

No German ‘hegemony’ in Europe, Merkel says

22.04.13 @ 17:34

  1. By Valentina Pop

Berlin – Chancellor Angela Merkel has said there is no German hegemony in Europe, but insisted that euro countries cede more sovereignty to overcome the crisis.

“To me this hegemonial [concept] is completely foreign,” she said on Monday (22 April) during a debate with Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk hosted by the Deutsche Bank in Berlin.

Merkel admitted that Germany has “sometimes a complicated role” in the EU and said that as a large, “but not the richest country,” it seeks to involve other states – like Poland – in the decision making process.

Having witnessed the collapse of East Germany under the Soviet Union, which ran the country’s economy into the ground, Merkel said she did not want the EU to fall apart too.

But the she rejected criticism voiced particularly in southern countries which suffer most from what is perceived to be a German-led austerity drive.

Read Full ArticleHere

 

This is  for  those  of you  out there  who are  into  flexing your investigative  muscles.  as  well as  those of  you   who love intrigue or  are just into an interesting  read. 

History  buffs would probably  enjoy  this  as  well.  As  it  gives  you  and  opportunity  to  piece  together information  that  you  do  know  or  have  researched.  I  found  it  very  interesting myself.  I  happen to  respect  Webster  Tarpley and  his  work.

ENJOY!!

 

~Desert Rose~

************************************************************************************************************************

From the April 2007 Idaho Observer:


 

Deathbed confessions, photos support claims that George H. Scherf(f), Jr., wasthe 41st U.S. president

 


According to Otto Skorzeny, pictured is the Scherff family and a few friends (circa 1938). Holding “Mother” Scherff’s hand at left is Martin Bormann. In front is Reinhardt Gehlen. In back is Joseph Mengele and to his right is Skorzeny as a young man. At center right (in the German navy uniform) is George H. Scherff, Jr. and his father George H. Scherff, Sr. Bormann became Hitler’s second in command. Reinhardt Gehlen was a chief SS officer and assassin who was smuggled out of Germany under Operation Paperclip. Skorzeny was Hitler’s bodyguard and SS spy/assassin who came to the U.S. after the war under Project Paperclip. Skorzeny and GHW Bush were instrumental in merging Nazi (SS) intelligence with the OSI to form the CIA with “Wild Bill” Donovan and Allen Dulles. These guys were also part of CIA mind control experiments such as MK-ULTRA. SS officer and physician Joseph Mengele, the notoriously sadistic “Angel of Death” of Auschwitz, escaped Germany to South America after the war. George H. Scherff, Jr., became the 41st President of the United States as GHW Bush and George H. Scherff, Sr., was Nicola Tesla’s “trusted assistant.”

 

What you are about to read is another step beyond research pioneered in the early 90s by author/historian Webster Tarpley based largely on deathbed “clues” provided by former Hitler bodyguard Otto Skorzeny and his box of photographs. Since Skorzeny’s death in 1999, the various leads he provided have been followed up and tend to support what, at first blush, would appear to be the unbelievable rantings of an embittered old man. What remains constant as we pore through publicly available official records, private correspondence, memoirs, newspaper articles, photos and other “clues” is that Bush family records (the ones that exist) are a puzzle palace of inconsistencies and curiosities. Since it is a congressionally established fact that Prescott Bush was in business with the Nazis during WWII, we can safely say that the Bush/Nazi connection existed. Who are the Bushes? How did they get connected with the Nazis? Is the connection still alive through U.S. presidents George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush? The answers are not as literal as we would like them to be. But we have the testimony of Otto Skorzeny and his photos—especially the one at right. So, here we go—the first installment of an investigation that points to a curious conclusion: The “Bush” family was created to destroy America.

By Don Nicoloff

What we are taught about history in American schools is not history, but a fairy tale. Better yet, it is propaganda designed to hoodwink an unsuspecting society about its true heritage and the treasonous acts and sabotage that were conceived in order to bring about a New World Order. You are about to learn the real identities of those who have infiltrated your nation on behalf of secret societies intent on bringing about the total slavery of mankind. In the past, others have written about the numerous conspiracies to control natural resources, energy, food and our sovereign right to live on planet Earth — not as slaves of a wealthy few — but as free men, women, and children exercising the free will given to them by God.

“Research” is the systematic investigation into and study of materials and sources in order to establish facts and reach new conclusions. This is important research. Read it carefully, with an open mind. Considering the use of fluorides (sodium fluoride) in drinking water and toothpaste, you may already be in denial. Fluorides (we are told) are for the prevention of tooth decay. You, the reader, can decide if they really work. The real reason they are added to your drinking water and toothpaste is to cause you to become psychologically and physically placid, and therefore, apathetic.

A thought problem

Imagine you were a member of a secret organization whose sole agenda was to control the entire planet. If your plan was to accomplish this goal without being perceived by your intended victims, discretion would be paramount. Your organization would devise a series of historical events that, on the surface, would appear to be everyday, happenstance occurrences (natural disasters, man-made diseases, acts of murder, assassination, terror, manipulation of money and energy supplies, contamination of foods, pollution of natural resources, and war). The timing of these events would require patience, careful planning, cooperation from others in positions of trust, stealth and deceit. In essence, the whole mission must derive its power through deception and concealment and must have a master plan.

Who were the designers of this master plan? Follow along as we connect the dots.

The Master Plan:

Arrival of the Bankers

At the turn of the 20th century, a plan to slowly take over the government of the United States began to unfold. Many works have been written about the Nazi machine that instigated two world wars, though few have traced the footsteps of the foreign financiers and the actors we prefer to call “politicians.”

A brief glance at shipping records, passenger manifests, and financial transactions on Wall Street indicates a pattern of deception which was masterminded by this same machine. The level of cooperation from government agencies and their elected officials was not only disgraceful, but blatantly treasonous.

In his book, “The Creature From Jekyll Island,”  [1]author G. Edward Griffin described the secret meetings which created the Federal Reserve in 1913. The architect of the plan, Paul M. Warburg, was a representative of the Rothschild banks in England and France and his brother Felix headed the Warburg banks in Germany and the Netherlands. Of significance is the fact that the first “official” media report about the Federal Reserve occurred three years later. In “Leslie’s Weekly,”  [2] B.C. Forbes described the secret meeting between Republican Senator Nelson W. Aldrich and six of the most powerful bankers in the world. That this meeting had to be conducted in a secret, clandestine island location indicates the level of deception, concealment—and treason—at work.

Paul Warburg

That Paul Warburg, a German national, spoke English well enough to craft a financial document (a volume consisting of 1,750 pages) resulting in the Federal Reserve Act designed to control the finances of the United States (from Europe) was no small feat. Of particular interest was how Warburg was able to establish these important connections prior to his arrival in the U.S. in 1913 and then orchestrate this financial coup. Warburg had to have known his co-conspirators before coming to America.

The first official record of Paul Warburg’s trip to the U.S. appeared in the Kaiser Wilhelm II passenger manifest, upon arrival at Ellis Island, October 13, 1903. [3] The official manifest (on line 7) lists a “Mr. P. Warburg, age 35; Occupation: Banker; Nationality: American; Heritage: German; Last Residence: Hamburg; Final Destination: New York; Home: 3 E. 82nd St., New York

In fact, Paul Warburg claimed he was an American in 1903. Was this claim valid in 1903?

Of special interest in this October 13, 1903 passenger manifest, is the fact that other prominent passengers in the elite financial community were also on the same passenger manifest. Harry Sachs (of Goldman Sachs fame) is listed as a passenger but, unlike Warburg, he was not required to declare his destination or his address. In fact, of the 30 passengers listed on page 293 of the Ellis Island database of ship and passenger arrivals, P. Warburg was the only passenger required to declare his destination.

Was this an attempt to establish Warburg’s nationality?

Suspiciously, the second half of the page is missing from the database, so we are not privileged with pertinent and “official” information as to his place of birth nor his physical description on this occasion. Future arrivals to the Port of New York would shed more light on these issues. The record keeping by the Immigration Office on October 13, 1903, was not merely sloppy. It appears that Warburg and other passengers were not scrutinized to the extent required by law and were assisted in entering the country with special, yet illegal considerations. Unlike earlier or later arrivals, immigration officers were permitted (or instructed) to be lax and obviously negligent, in their duties, particularly where destinations and birthplaces were of concern.

Warburg’s second arrival to the U.S. (on the SS Deutschland) was similar to his first. Though still a “U.S. citizen” in 1905, he was demoted to “merchant.” [4] However, on a third arrival in 1906, Warburg was, once again, a “banker.” His memory had failed him on this (third) trip, when he declared he had “never been to the U.S. previously.” Neither had his wife and two children, who had travelled with him on prior trips. He had also forgotten about his home in New York City, too, when he claimed he had no address in the United States. On this visit, Warburg declared “Hamburg, Germany” as his place of birth.

Incredibly, on a later visit to the U.S., Warburg claimed he was officially a “naturalized citizen,” citing the “Circuit Court of New York City, March 21, 1911” [5] as the place and date where he had been bestowed his citizenship. Despite Warburg’s earlier proclamations, he was not declared a U.S. citizen until that time. Warburg thereby committed perjury, which was overlooked on numerous occasions by the Immigration Service officials, seemingly an act of treason on each occurrence. During subsequent visits to the U.S. in 1910, 1912 and 1913, while again proclaiming his U.S. citizenship, Warburg referred to 17 E. 80th St., New York as his home address. Not once was there any mention of his association with the Rothschild banks in Paris and London, and his permanent residency in Europe, not in America. Why the deception?

James Loeb

Not to be outdone, James Loeb, a partner in the Kuhn, Loeb & Company banking firm in New York City, traveled with Warburg on October 13, 1903. Loeb declared his U.S. citizenship on this trip, though he apparently suffered from amnesia in 1910, neglecting to declare any country of origin and later, in  1912, declaring to the U.S. Immigration Service that his birthplace was “Landsberg, Germany,” [6] a small town west of Munich.

Loeb also indicated (trip on this) that he was staying “with Mr. Warburg.”

Amnesia must have been a disease that plagued most German bankers at the turn of the century. The disease didn’t stop there and soon spread to institutes of higher education. Harvard University Press published a memorial biography to the founder of the Loeb Classical Library, bequeathed to Harvard University by none other than James Loeb, one year after his death in 1933. “James Loeb was born August 6, 1867, in New York City, the son of Solomon and Betty (Goldberg) Loeb. Solomon was a partner and founder of the banking firm, Kuhn, Loeb & Company,” the tribute began. [7]

Certainly, Harvard University would have known where Loeb was born and, for that matter, so would have Loeb. If this quotation were true, then what would have caused Loeb to state (to the INSin 1912 that he was born in “Landsberg, Germany?”

The Harvard Press biography did little to legitimize the matter of Loeb’s birthplace, though it was a valiant attempt.

Still, if there remained any confusion, the U.S. Immigration Service could have clarified the issue based on the information it had acquired in 1903 and again in 1910. But that was not the agency’s intention. The Immigration and Naturalization Service agents were complicit in hiding James Loeb’s true birthplace and his association with financiers of the future German Nazi Party, an act which was aided and abetted by the sloppy, incomplete immigration records kept at Ellis Island and the Port of New York. That was part of the deception. Yes, he lived and worked in New York and may have attended Harvard University. But, considering the connections Kuhn, Loeb & Company had to the banks that supported the Nazis through money-laundering activities until getting caught in 1942, it was most likely that Loeb (like Warburg) had been groomed for his role in order to maintain the founders’ (of this “master plan”) “bloodline.”

There were other inconsistencies in the Harvard Press biography, again, based upon the above-mentioned records. “In the winter of 1891 a severe illness (possibly depression) obliged him to give up business and he spent the summer traveling in Scandinavia, returning to banking again only until January 1, 1902, when he retired due to renewed health problems” [Amnesia?].

James Loeb could not have traveled and returned to the United States during 1892, unless he had swum upon his return trip. The first of his three voyages to Ellis Island (from Europe on the Kaiser Wilhelm II) arrived on October 13, 1903, as previously mentioned. It was unlikely he would have returned to any port of entry other than New York, unless he had arrived at some other secret location. And there were no transatlantic airline flights in 1903. The Harvard story had to have been a fabrication intended to hide some dark secret.

Considering the sizable endowments Loeb lavished upon Harvard and other notable educational, medical, and art institutions in Boston and New York, it was most advantageous for Harvard to portray Loeb as a philanthropist and victim of “depression” (hardly fit for a transatlantic swim), than as a German banker whose father’s company supported the “master planners’” war machine before and during two world wars. 

According to further reminiscent accounts, “He retired to a quieter place, his farm at Shrewsbury, New Jersey, moving to Germany in 1905, where he stayed (except for a period during World War I) until his death in 1933.”  

Evidently, Harvard was unaware of two more trips (documented by the Federal Government) that Loeb made to New York in 1910, and again in 1912. It was no coincidence that Loeb’s return trips to the U.S. (as an on-again, off-again U.S. citizen) were orchestrated to accommodate Paul Warburg’s meetings with Wall Street bankers of German persuasion, as they plotted to create the Federal Reserve System, a foreign entity.

“On graduation, he received an offer through his teacher and friend Charles Eliot Norton to study Egyptology in Paris and London.”

Norton was the “appointed professor of history of art at Harvard University,”  “from 1856 to 1874 Norton spent much time in travel and residence on the continent of Europe and in England,” and was the first president of the Archaeological Institute of America (1879-1890),” according to his biography at wikipedia.org. [8] It would seem that Egypt was a more suitable location for studying Egyptology than Paris and London, where Paul Warburg managed the Rothschild  banks.

Loeb died in Munich in 1933, lending belated credence to his 1912 assertion, to the INS, that he was “born in Landsberg, Germany” and was a “German citizen” — “never having previously been in America.”

Nikola Tesla

Despite conflicting literary and historical accounts, Nikola Tesla, a Serb, was born on July 10, 1856, in Smilja, Lika province, or what is now modern-day Croatia. Prior to World War I, Smilja was on the border of the Austro-Hungarian empire so, in effect, Tesla was a citizen of Austrian origin.

The son of a Serbian Orthodox priest who rose to the rank of Archbishop, Tesla had the opportunity to study a variety of topics contained in his father’s personal library. As a young boy, he accompanied his father on trips to Rome, where he was able to study the lesser-known works stored in the Vatican’s vast scientific repository.

Upon completing his studies in engineering and physics at the Polytechnic Institute in Graz, Austria, Tesla attended the University at Prague. He demonstrated, early on, an innate ability to solve mechanical and scientific problems, especially in the area of electricity and its applications in power production. After working for Edison Telephone Company subsidiaries in Budapest, Paris, and other cities throughout Europe, Nikola Tesla went to America, to meet the man whose company gave him his first job, Thomas Edison.

Tesla found it difficult to work for Edison (due to Edison’s reneging on financial promises), but soon found backers to finance his research and development projects and his new inventions. Financiers, such as John Pierpont (J.P.) Morgan, George Westinghouse and John Jacob Astor were among those who saw the potential in Tesla’s pioneering, entrepreneurial spirit to capitalize on his technological discoveries in electricity, wireless communications, and physics.

The only official documentation of Nikola Tesla’s arrival to the United States was, again, produced at the Port of New York. [9] On April 7, 1882 a 25-year old Tesla arrived via the SS Nordland, which departed from Antwerp. He had returned, on this trip to the U.S., after lecturing in Paris. Tesla’s destination: New York. Tesla immigrated as a “laborer,” though this label hardly befit the man who would become the most prolific inventor in history, with some 700 technological patents to his credit.

Previous accounts of Tesla’s association with Thomas Edison’s projects place him in the United States in the 1870s. His many technological discoveries were certain to have drawn the attention of those hungry for world domination and superiority. By and large, Tesla’s inventions and his career were excluded from our history books because his inventions and patents were stolen and then weaponized. It was never intended for us to learn about the suppression of Tesla’s advanced scientific discoveries, nor about those who profited from their theft—the orchestrators of the master plan.

Though much has been written about Tesla’s successes and failures, few have detailed the behind-the-scenes financial activities which disclose a Nazi plot to acquire his technology, while research and development costs had largely been paid (unknowingly) by U.S. taxpayers. Many of Tesla’s patents fell into Nazi hands prior to and during World Wars I and II. As a result, Tesla continuously found himself in litigation over patent rights and other issues.

Although he had succeeded in winning the majority of his patent lawsuits, his technology had been repeatedly stolen and sold to the German Nazis and other foreign governments, so he never achieved the financial success he deserved. The embezzlement of his capitalization went unchecked throughout Tesla’s career. At the time of his death (by murder, according to Skorzeny) on January 6, 1943, Tesla died virtually penniless.

Tesla’s Assistant,

George H. Scherff, Sr.

Nikola Tesla’s successes in discovering new technologies did not go unnoticed by many industrial capitalists and world governments. In fact, many of his inventions were developed through secret government programs which began soon after his discoveries in alternating current (AC), electromagnetic energy, electric motors, generators, coils, radio transmission, energy-saving devices, and wireless transmission technologies.

Since Tesla was often buried deep in research at remote labs, many of his financial and legal affairs were supervised by his closest associate, George H. Scherff. Scherff often advised Tesla about pending patent litigation, contracts, proposals, demonstrations, and financial affairs. As any trusty associate would, Scherff stood beside Tesla through all the ups and downs of his financial nightmares, sometimes arranging for extended credit at the Waldorf-Astoria, where Tesla often resided, or by obtaining a cash advance toward research he had been contracted to perform. Near the end of his career, Tesla was evicted from the Waldorf for an outstanding bill which exceeded $20,000 — a rather large sum for those days.

As Tesla worked on secret U.S. government projects at Colorado Springs, Colorado, Scherff communicated to Tesla the status of his business affairs. Tesla spoke of hopeful, future financial successes, though Scherff repeatedly delivered the news of dwindling funds. Tesla had begun construction of a wireless power transmission tower (“Wardenclyffe,” Shoreham, Long Island) with funds invested by J.P. Morgan. When Morgan discovered that the tower would transmit free electricity and radio waves, he cancelled the project and had the tower dismantled, then sold for scrap. Morgan was not about to allow Americans to receive free electricity, television and radio. Tesla was devastated when he received the news, but continued on with his new inventions.

Some 12 years later, on October 14, 1918, Scherff wrote to Tesla at Colorado Springs. The correspondence focused on the usual disclosure of pending legal issues and attorney matters and was sent to Tesla on Tesla Company letterhead containing the company’s headquarters address at 8 W. 40th Street, New York, NY. [10] On October 15, 1918, (the next day) Tesla responded to Scherff’s letter (it seems impossible regarding our understanding of the technology available at the time, but these are the dates attached to the correspondence). 

An interesting anomaly: Tesla’s response was addressed to “George Scherff, Esq.,” Union Sulphur Co., 17 Battery Pl., New York, NY (Union Sulphur Company?). [11] This address was not the location of the Nikola Tesla Company.

The Rockefeller Connection

Records show that 17 Battery Place is the Whitehall Building and was owned by Frank Rockefeller, who, with his brothers William and John D., also owned many of the companies with offices located there. The International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) had its world headquarters there, as well as a variety of oil, mining, and chemical companies. [12] Though Union Sulphur Company was run by its president, Herman Frasch, a German chemist who patented extraction methods for sulphur and petroleum, Frasch also worked for John D. Rockefeller’s Standard Oil Company (in New York, New Jersey, and Cleveland, Ohio), developing similar extraction methods.

On the basis of this association, George Scherff, Sr., had connections with the Rockefeller family, though it is unclear if Tesla was at all aware of this connection.

Frank Rockefeller was also an investor of Buckeye Steel Castings in Columbus, Ohio. Buckeye manufactured automatic couplers and chassis for railroad cars owned by the Harrimans, the Rockefellers, and J.P. Morgan. Eventually, Samuel P. Bush was promoted from general manager to president of the company after producing gigantic profits.

Samuel P. Bush’s association with the Rockefellers and his subsequent position as Director of the War Industries Board afforded him the opportunity to create contracts with Remington Arms during the war, courtesy of Percy Rockefeller.

Nikola Tesla’s trusted assistant (sometimes referred to as “accountant” or “secretary”) George Scherff, Sr., worked at Union Sulphur Company. Normally, this association would not set off  alarms, considering the state of Tesla’s affairs. Scherff had every right to earn a decent living in order to support his family. That was “the American Way.” But a careful examination of Union Sulphur Co. might reveal that someone was being deceived — Tesla, and Scherff was at the root of this deception.

Who was George Scherff?

Who was George Scherff? Better yet, who was George H. Scherff, Sr.? There exists no legitimate record of a George H. Scherff being born in the U.S. from the late-1800s through 1925, yet, George Scherff was Nikola Tesla’s assistant/accountant. If he was born in Germany, could his birthplace shed some light on this mystery? Probably—if they exist (it has become apparent that individuals associated with the Nazi Party commonly have all or parts of their genealogical records expunged—we will explore this further in the section of this article dealing with the “Bush” family tree).

Otto Skorzeny: S.S./ODESSA/CIA master spy and assassin

Friends and acquaintances of Nikola Tesla recall him complaining about Scherff’s son, George, Jr., always snooping around Tesla’s lab. On more than one occasion (probably during the late 1930s), Tesla caught the 14-year old Scherff looking at his notes, poring through his books, and stealing small items from his lab. Tesla gave him the nickname, “Curious George” and likened him to a “mischievous monkey.” According to Skorzeny, (Adolph Hitler’s former bodyguard) in a deathbed confession to Eric “Orion” (Eric Berman) in S. Miami, Florida, Tesla, “hated the younger Scherff.” In fact, according to Skorzeny, the “Curious George” book and movie were inspired by Tesla’ s suggestion.

Curiously, the day before the national theatrical release of the Hollywood production of the Curious George feature length film, Alan Shalleck, the originator of Curious George (and the man in the Yellow hat), was found murdered under a pile of plastic garbage bags in his driveway in Florida at age 76. [13]

In short, Otto Skorzeny claimed that the true identity of George H.W. Bush was “George H. Scherff, Jr., the son of Nikola Tesla’s illegal-immigrant, German-born accountant, George H. Scherff, Sr.”

 


The unmistakable Otto Skorzeny with Adolph Hitler.

 

Worth a thousand words: But this was not the only bombshell Otto Skorzeny delivered that day in late-1999. Skorzeny, producing a shoe box full of 60-years worth of his personal photographs, showed them to Berman, describing each one in great detail. The collection featured a photo of a young, majestic Skorzeny in full S.S. Nazi military dress, next to his Führer, Adolph Hitler. Then there were photos of Reinhard Gehlen (S.S. spy and assassin) Dr. Joseph Mengele (the “Angel of Death”) Martin Bormann (Hitler aide and S.S. assassin) and Adolph Hitler (photographed in 1997 at age 107).

The Hitler photo was taken during a “reunion” at the Lake McDonald Lodge in Glacier National Park, Montana, on August 27, 1997. According to Skorzeny, Adolph Hitler was alive and well in the U.S. in 1997!

Skorzeny did not stop there. He produced a photo of a young Skorzeny, Mengele, Bormann, and the family of George H. Scherff, Sr.. Seated in the midst of those in the photo was a young George H. Scherff, Jr., who, Skorzeny explained, was trained as a spy and sent to America to work for Adolph Hitler. “He was given false identification and adopted by Prescott Sheldon Bush as his “son,” George Herbert Walker Bush,” Skorzeny went on. “He forged a birth certificate in order to enter the military before he turned 18. He was 16 at the time.”

In the family photo, a young Scherff and Bormann both sported a German Navy uniform. Scherff later enlisted in the U.S. Navy as “George H.W. Bush.”

In even greater detail, Otto Skorzeny described how (“contrary to the CIA-written history books”) he helped Hitler escape to Austria in a plane flown by a female pilot, Hanna Reitsch. “Hitlerdid not commit suicide,” Skorzeny recounted. “His double was shot between the eyes, and the dental records proved he was not Hitler. The Americans kept it a secret, worried the truth might anger the Russians.” 

Eric “Orion” (Berman), in a live radio interview on Republic Broadcasting Network, January 17, 2006, [14] detailed how “Skorzeny died on December 31, 1999. His body was cremated, I have a copy of his death certificate, and I saw his ashes. After the war, he helped George Bush found the CIA through Operation Paperclip and ODESSA.”

Berman recounted how Skorzeny was found “not guilty” at the Nuremburg trials, and then ushered into the CIA. “Some 50,000+ S.S. Nazi war criminals, not just rocket scientists, were brought to America after the war.”

Skorzeny, about age 90 at the time, was described by Berman as “very focused and very lucid, and he was still very mobile. He was still able to walk around—he was still very impressive and he had about the biggest hands I have ever shaken. He was 6’-4”and was a giant for his day. He towered over me, and I’m 5’-8”.”

When asked why he thought Skorzeny entrusted this information to him, Berman responded, “I was dating one of his daughters. He knew that I’m Jewish, first of all, I’m an honest guy and he thought that  I would really try to do something about this and bring some justice, yeah, to these wanted Nazi war criminals. His whole goal was…. they had screwed him over, including George Bush, they screwed him over….. and out of large sums of money over the years. This was his one last way of… you know, getting even with them.”

A biographical article about Nikola Tesla appeared in the Tesla Tech, Inc. magazine, “Extraordinary Technology,” Volume 4, Number 3, Aug., Sept., Oct., 2006. [15] The article, written by Dustin Wallace, spoke of Tesla’s childhood, some of his inventions, and his last days. Wallace wrote (pp. 21-22), “The Yugoslav Monarchy in Exile was summoned to visit Tesla in the fall of 1942. However, Charlotte Muzar, a secretary, paid Tesla the visit. From his condition upon her arrival she felt as though he may not live through the night. Another friend of Tesla’s, Kenneth Swezey visited him during the time and noted that he was existing on warm milk and Nabisco crackers alone. It was apparent that Tesla was nearing the end of his time. By late December of 1942, Tesla began meeting with two U.S. government agents in order to share some of his most sensitive discoveries. These men carried away many of his documents for microfilming. 

“On January 4, 1943, Tesla’s faithful assistant, George Scherff, visited Tesla for the last time, Tesla was found deceased in his hotel room on the morning of January 8. 1943. He had passed away between those four days since Scherff’s visit.”

The article continued, “Following Tesla’s death the United States Office of Alien Property, under the instructions of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, confiscated all of Tesla’s papers and property. This was an interesting maneuver considering that Tesla was a United States citizen.”

The significance of this benign description of Tesla’s inventions and his last days has a direct relationship to the previously unknown claims of Otto Skorzeny. As Skorzeny described (to Berman) in detail his involvement with George H. W. Bush (George H. Scherff, Jr.) in organizing the CIA by absorbing Nazi S.S. agents,” he intimated that it was Reinhard Gehlen and himself who murdered Nikola Tesla on January 6, 1943 by strangulation/suffocation.

Prior to the murder, Skorzeny and Gehlen “spoke in great detail to Tesla about his most-advanced technologies and then stole the blueprints of his best, most-secret inventions.”

Were these the “two U.S. government agents” about whom Dustin Wallace wrote? The timing of George Scherff’s last visit to Nikola Tesla was suspicious, as well.

Skorzeny did not stop with these soul-cleansing disclosures. He went on to describe the aliases of himself Frank Edward P_ _ _ _ _, of south Florida (according to Berman, who claims he is trying to protect Skorzeny’s daughter), Reinhard Gehlen (Hank Janowicz, Wayne, N.J.), and Dr. Joseph Mengele (Steven Rabel). According to Berman, “Gehlen was tipped off by the FBI about Skorzeny’s unveiling of his identity and location, and Gehlen (Janowicz) then went into hiding. Mengele (Rabel), through a series of anti-aging hormone injections, a black hairpiece, and ‘cannibalism’ has maintained a youthful appearance.”

Having investigated some of Skorzeny’s claims, Berman had contacted the U.S. Justice Department to inform them that Nazi spies were being harbored by certain factions of the U.S. intelligence agencies, in particular, the CIA. “My thoughts were that, uh,  I needed to try to bring these wanted SS Nazi war criminal, holocaust killers—terrorists, basically—to justice. I wanted to call our government and tell ‘em, ‘Hey, that they’re still alive.’ I wanted to bring ‘em to justice. That was my whole intention. I initially had contacted, or tried to contact Eli Rosenbaum, who was the Director of the United States Justice Department, Office of Special Investigations. Basically, they, uh, thought it was a hoax and they told me that I was mistaken, and that according to the CIA, ‘all of them were all dead and I was mistaken.’ That’s what they told me. I was wrong.

“Later that night, I was over at, uh, Skorzeny’s house, and his widow received a phone call that turned her white, and she almost passed out. Basically, someone from the OSI tipped her off that I had contacted them… and that I had known about them. Later that night, when I was comin’ back home, uh, a car pulled up behind me, flashing his lights, wanting me to pull over. So I pulled over—I knew somethin’ was probably goin’ on, so I was ready, and somebody walked right next to me—it looked like he had a gun in his hand, possibly, so I sped away. All right, uh, my girlfriend was in the car at the time, all right, and I sped through three lanes of traffic and went into a local shopping center, and he pulled in right behind me—and he gave me a dirty look—then he pulled a couple feet away, then he drove off.  But, uh, I’m sure they tried to put a hit out on me. That’s what it was.”

Berman then confirmed the girlfriend was Skorzeny’s daughter and added, “She, uh, she didn’t know that I knew… she didn’t know that her father had told me all this. That’s why we’re no longer goin’ out. She broke up with me when the government tipped her off that I wrote a book about her family.”

In order to authenticate the above revelations, the author began conducting his own research into the alias of Otto Skorzeny. The first detail, considering Berman’s “cryptic clue” of Skorzeny’s CIA name, was to determine the variety of names that begin with the letter “P” — Palmer, Parson, Paskel,  Peller, Porter, Powell, etc., settling on “Powell” as the most-likely possibility. Then, there was the distinct possibility that Skorzeny (for the purpose of protecting his wife and children) slightly misled Berman about his “official” alias, by reversing his first and middle names.

An exhaustive search revealed an interesting twist. Since Skorzeny had children, he likely had a wife. In fact, he did have a wife and left a trail (though worn out by time), that might shed some light on the master plan (this issue is discussed later).

Further research about the life of Otto Skorzeny, “master spy,” reveals his little-known affair with Eva (Evita) Marie Duarte de Peron, wife of Argentina’s President, Juan Domingo Peron. Gold which was stolen by the Nazis (laundered by Swiss banks and the Vatican, then smuggled to Argentina by Admiral Wilhelm Canaris) had accrued enormous interest after World War II, and upon her death, Eva Peron bequeathed Skorzeny $100 million, which ultimately fell into the hands of the CIA. The Nazi-CIA connection to the money was obvious. Based upon Skorzeny’s claims, this money probably fell into the hands of George H.W. Bush and his “handlers.”

 

George H. Scherff, Jr., visits the FBI

Upon the untimely death of Nikola Tesla, perhaps the world’s most renowned scientist in history, J. Edgar Hoover, Director of the FBI, received an unexpected visit from George H. Scherff, Jr. That George Scherff, Sr., Tesla’s trusted associate, chose to send his teenage son to visit the FBI’s notorious director should have raised a red flag, which it probably did among intelligence agencies. Scherff, Jr., explained to Hoover that he had worked for Tesla and was entitled to his papers and other effects. He also expressed concern that “a foreign government might also be interested in his inventions.” [16]

Scherff, Jr., also gave Hoover an address, “149 Secord (sic) Rd., New Rochelle, New York” [“Seacord” is the correct spelling].

FOIA file on “subject, Nikola Tesla”: “Mr. George H. Scherff Jr. advised that he had received two letters… Mr. Scherff stated that he was an associate of Nikola Tesla in 1914 and that for many years, his father had been Dr. Tesla’s private secretary. Mr. Scherff said that he had never heard of Leland J. Anderson nor any of the names mentioned in Anderson’s letter” (Anderson had written to the Scherff household seeking information about Tesla’s writings. He was working on a thesis for school and had been seeking information from Tesla’s associates and communications).

(February 3, 1954) “Mr. Scherff stated that he has quite a bit of Tesla’s writings in his possession and he didn’t know whether or not they would be of value to a foreign government.”

There are several glaring discrepancies and inconsistencies in George H. Scherff, Jr.’s statements to the FBI (or the actual intent of the document). The author conducted his own research into the background of George H. Scherff, Sr., and, from all indications, concludes that George H. Scherff, Jr., could not have worked for Nikola Tesla in 1914. Scherff, Jr. wasn’t even alive in 1914, so he could not have “worked for him” then or at any other time (based upon the numerous accounts about “Curious George,” Tesla could not even tolerate him being around his laboratory). It is highly unlikely that Tesla would have hired (or did hire) him. Other than a book written by John J. O’Neill, ‘Prodigal Genius, The Life of Nikola Tesla’ in 1944, this was also the only known reference to Tesla having a secretary named “George H. Scherff.” [17]

For the greater part of his career, Tesla’s secretary was Dorothy F. Skerritt. Both Skerritt and Muriel Arbus worked for him at the time of his retirement, which was forced due to dwindling funds. The acknowledgments at the end of the book describe George H. Scherff as a “business associate,” and there is no mention whatsoever of George H. Scherff, Jr. ever having worked for Tesla.

So why did Scherff, Jr., lie to the FBI? Because it was dangerous for him to tell Hoover the truth about the real identities of his father and himself. Why would George H. Scherff, Sr. send his teen-age son to seek papers and other records (belonging to Tesla) from the FBI and not do it himself? Because the Director of the FBI, Herbert J. Hoover, would have recognized him as someone other than George H. Scherff, Sr. In fact, it is highly plausible that the individual who spoke to the FBI was not a Scherff and was a stand in. 

There also remains the most-likely possibility that the Scherff  interview was nothing more than a ruse, created by the FBI for the purpose of obfuscating the facts around the government’s involvement in the murder of Nikola Tesla, the theft of and covert infringement on his patents, and the money laundering that ensued between a few Wall Street banks and Adolph Hitler’s Nazi Party. Anyone interviewing George H. Scherff, Jr., would have easily recognized that he was not old enough “to have worked for Nikola Tesla in 1914.”

Redacted statements in the above-referenced FOIA files indicate something was being covered up. The “Scherff” documents were created to thwart the research efforts of Leland J. Anderson, hide the facts behind Tesla’s murder, and dispel any speculation that the FBI stole Tesla’s records, research documents and new technologies.

In 1942, less than a year prior to Tesla’s untimely death, it was already known that principles at New York’s Union Banking Corporation had been caught “Trading with the Enemy,” Nazi Germany. Among the principals was George Herbert Walker, Prescott Sheldon Bush, “son” of industrialist Samuel Prescott Bush, who was president of Buckeye Steel Castings in Columbus, Ohio and the director of the Facilities Division of the War Industries Board. The WIB gave Samuel P. Bush unprecedented ties to the Eastern elite families through its association with one of the largest weapons manufacturers, Remington Arms. Buckeye Steel Castings supplied the railroad industry, controlled by the Rockefellers, the Harrimans, and J.P. Morgan with coupling parts and chassis for their tankers and railcars.

Behind the scenes, Archbishop Francis Cardinal Spellman secretly influenced (or controlled) the activities of key intelligence agencies in the U.S., thus, affording the Vatican the opportunity to suppress potentially damaging information from reaching the public. Spellman and Hoover served the same “master,” though it was not the U.S. government. Upon the revelations of the New York / Nazi money laundering and war profiteering, records in the National Archives, in particular those related to Samuel P. Bush, were destroyed “in order to save space.” Most likely, those records exposed multiple, covert relationships in a conspiracy of monumental proportions.

 


Tesla with King Peter II of Yugoslavia at the Hotel New Yorker July 15, 1942. It is strange that Tesla, one of the most brilliant inventors ever, would die penniless and his “trusted assistant”, according to Otto Skorzeny and some strangely corroborating records, was “George H. Scherff, Sr.” Tesla died January 6, 1943.

 

References, Part 1:

1) “The Creature from Jeckyll Island,” G. H. Griffin

2) “Leslie’s Weekly, B.C Forbes

3) http://ellisisland.org/, P. Warburg, passenger record / manifest

4) http://ellisisland.org/, Paul M. Warburg, passenger record / manifest

5) http://ellisisland.org/, Paul Warburg, passenger record / manifest

6) http://ellisisland.org/, James Loeb, passenger record / manifest

7) Harvard University Press, Loeb Classic Library, “Our Founder”

8) http://wilipedia.org/, Charles Eliot Norton

9) http://ellisisland.org/, Nikola Tesla, passenger record / manifest

10) Photocopy of The Tesla Company document sent by Scherff to Tesla in Colorado

11) Photocopy of reply to George Scherff , Union Sulphur Co., New York, NY

12) http://www.nyc-architecture.com/LM/LM011-WHITEHALLBUILDING.htm

13) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Shalleck, numerous Internet news reports

14) http://republicbroadcasting.org/, The Investigative Journal show archives, 01-17-2006

15) “Extraordinary Technology,” Volume 4, Number 3, Aug.-Oct., 2006, pp. 21-22

16) FOIA / J. Edgar Hoover, FBI files on subject: Nikola Tesla

17) “Prodigal Genius, The Life of Nikola Tesla,” John J. O’Neil, 1944

 

Part 2: Deathbed confessions, photos support claims that George H. Scherf(f), Jr., was 41st U.S. president

Why did the most brilliant scientist in history die penniless with his inventions benefiting megalo-maniacal governments and ruthless organized criminals? Why are the world’s most profitable businesses oil, chemicals, war, pharmaceuticals, “illegal” drugs, human slavery and prostitution? Why do “democratic” governments rule their people with oppressive, police-state tactics? Why do these “democracies” poison the food, the water, the air and the land; why do they tax and regulate their people into slavery?

It is simple to understand when you put these questions into human terms. We know how people occupy niches in our own circles of influence; how we all try to maximize our opportunities within a given set of circumstances—and how some can be depended upon to lie, cheat and/or steal their way into success within an operating framework.

Look at the Bush and Walker families’ lineage on this page and keep it in your mind as you read through and internalize this part of the story—the story of why America is ailing, how she became ill and who poisoned her. The relationships are (intentionally?) complex and difficult to decipher, so we have attempted to reduce them to workable symbols as if parts of equations. When we come out the other side of this article, we should have no question in our minds as to which “families” have been most influential in the preplanned destruction of America and her once-free people.

By Don Nicoloff

Note to readers:In an effort to minimize the patterns of chronological and geneological confusion that define the “Bush” family history, we have developed a “guide” to chart the relationships, have reduced the names to more easily recognized symbols (their initials) and attached them to overviews highlighting their relevant qualities. It should also be noted that for those people who have two identities, they are symbolized as both, with the initials in boldface to indicate the identity being described. We suggest that you first digest the “personality key.” Once you have a working knowledge of the “players,” you will be ready to begin reading this article with the greatest possibility of making the connections suggested therein. We also suggest that you refer to the personality key as often as necessary.

The “Bushes”

1. ONB (Obadiah Newcomb Bush)

2. JSB (James Smith Bush)

3. SPB (Samuel P. Bush)

4. GHS1/PSB

(George H. Scherf(f), Sr./

Prescott Sheldon Bush)

5. GHS2/GHWB

(George H. Scherf(f), Jr./

George Herbert Walker Bush)

5a. BPB (Barbara Pierce Bush)

Bush personality key

1. ONB – To give any consideration to the possibility of this person being related, at all to those who came here to destroy the United States is not only a waste of time, it is absurd. Once again, another “ancestor” conveniently died “at sea.” This story is not even clever propaganda.

2. JSB – b. 15 June, 1825, Rochester, NY, d. 11 Nov. 1889, Ithaca, NY / Marriage: 24 Feb. 1859, to Harriet Eleanor Fay, Trinity Church, New York, NY (Episcopalian minister who converted to Unitarian – a fact ignored by heirs.) Was rector at Grace Church, not “Brick Church.” Also attorney.

Harriet Eleanor Fay – b. 27 Feb., 1829, Savannah, GA, d. 29 Oct. 1924, Boston, MA

3. SPB – b. 4 Oct., 1863, Brick Church, NJ (Wrong: Brick Church is not a city or town in NJ) Most likely emigrated from Germany as industrial spy / operative., d. 8 Feb. 1948, Columbus, OH / Marriage: 27 Jun. 1894, Columbus, OH to Flora Sheldon (Appeared to escape all censuses except 1930, thus avoiding detection by Census Bureau).

Flora Sheldon – b. 17 March, 1872, Franklin Cty., OH, d. 4 Sep. 1920, Watch Hill, RI (struck by automobile).

4. GHS1/PSB – b. 15 May 1895, Columbus, OH (Wrong), d. 8 Oct., 1972, New York, NY, (Emigrated to U.S. as George Scherff, “assistant to Nikola Tesla”) / Marriage: 6 Sept., 1921, Kennebunkport, ME to Dorothy Walker (German birth records expunged.) Consistently misstated father’s birthplace, citing NY and MA. Major role in “Trading with the Enemy” conspiracy in 1940’s.

Dorothy Walker – b. 1 July, 1901, Walker’s Point, ME, d. 19 Nov., 1992, Greenwich, CT.

5. GHS2/GHWB – b. 12 June, 1924, Milton, MA (Wrong: Forged birth certificate to enlist in U.S. Navy). Emigrated from Germany covertly to U.S. as George Scherff, Jr., son of Nikola Tesla’s assistant, George Scherff, Sr., as spy for Adolph Hitler. (German birth records expunged). Marriage: 6 Jan., 1945 to “Barbara Pierce.”

5a. BPB- b. 8 June, 1925, Rye, NY (Wrong: Based upon 1930 Census, she was 4 yrs., 2 mos. old. Correct age was 5 years, 2 mos.). Most likely emigrated from Germany, since no birth record exists in U.S. Likely “borrowed” name from the daughter of William Brown Pierce and Isabel Ayres who died on unknown date and at unknown place. Married to George H. Scherf, Jr. aka George H.W. Bush. Her parents, “Marvin and Pauline Pierce,” had no children, according to familysearch.org. Her “grandmother,” Kate P. Pierce, emigrated from Bavaria, Germany.

The “Walkers”

1. TWI (Thomas Walker I)

2. CTWII (Captain Thomas Walker II)

3. TWIII (Thomas Walker III)

4. GEW (George E. Walker)

5. DDW (David “Davis” Walker)

6. GHW (George Herbert Walker)

7. DW (Dorothy Walker)

Walker personality key

1. TWI – No DOB, no birthplace, no date of marriage, and no parents. Married to

Catharine (No maiden name, no DOB, no birthplace, no date of marriage).

2. CTWII - b. England (No DOB, no town) Christened: 02 Aug., 1758 Holy Trinity, Gosport, Hampshire, England Died: “At sea about 1797.”

Catherine McLelland – b. England (No DOB, no town). Marriage: 22 Feb., 1785, St. Andrew’s Church, Clifton, England / d. 18 Oct., 1806, Philadelphia, PA.

3. TWIII – The “unmentioned” son of Captain Thomas and Catherine Walker – b. 14 Oct., 1787, (no town), England /d. 18 Jun., 1870, Tazewell, IL, buried at Bloomington, IL.

4. GEW - b. “Burlington, NJ or MD circa. 1797,” d. 28 Oct., 1864, Bloomington, IL, brother of Thomas Walker III.

Harriet Mercer – b. “about” 1802, MD, d. 24 Oct., 1869, Bloomington, IL, Marriage: 22 May, 1821, Baltimore, MD.

5. DDW - son of George E. and Harriet Walker. b. 19 Jan., 1840, Leeds, England. (Not “on a farm near Bloomington, IL” and not in MO as stated to the Census.) d. 4 Oct., 1918, Walker’s Point, Kennebunkport, ME.

Martha Adela Beaky – b. 1 Jun., 1841, Emmitsburg, MD, d. “after 1906.” Marriage: 25 Dec., 1862. Her father, Joseph Ambrose Beaky, “died in the Mississippi River” on 27 Jan. 1858)

6. GHW – b. 11 Jun. 1875, Leeds, England (Not in 1874 in St. Louis, MO as claimed to Census), d. 24 Jun., 1953, New York, NY. Father, D.D. Walker, “born in MO, MD, and MO” in three consecutive Censuses; not in Bloomington, IL, as claimed in biographies.

Lucretia Wear – b. 17 Sept., 1874, St. Louis, MO, d. 28 Aug., 1961, Biddeford, ME / Marriage: 17 Jan., 1899.

7. DW - daughter of George and Lucretia Walker. b. 1 July, 1901, Walker’s Point, ME, d. 19 Nov., 1992, Greenwich, CT. Marriage: 6 Sept., 1921, Kennebunkport, ME, to “Prescott Sheldon Bush” (GHS1/PSB).

Prescott Sheldon Bush

(GHS1/PSB)

According to the CIA-written history books and cleverly-crafted political stories, Prescott Sheldon Bush was born on May 15, 1895, in Columbus, Ohio. Ironically, genealogical profiles by some independent researchers and relatives cite his birthdate as “March 12 or 13.”

Certainly, those tracing the Bushes’ roots and family history would have gotten it right. It would also seem that the son of such a prominent industrialist (with powerful political connections in Washington, D.C.) would have been given a birth certificate, clearing up this discrepancy once and for all.

The Bush family “history” claims that the young Prescott “attended the Douglas School,”also in Columbus, Ohio. The problem with this claim is that there was no Douglas Schoolin Columbus in 1900, nor for most of the 20th century.

So we now have two disputable claims entered in the history books and current genealogical records: Prescott Bush’s date and place of birth and his schooling in Ohio.

Bush’s family biography then describes his “enrollment at St. Georges School,” a co-ed, Episcopalian prep school near Newport, Rhode Island, from 1908-1913. How he was able to “transfer” to this prestigious school for the wealthy (after attending a school that never existed) leaves room for much speculation. It is unclear how many grade levels the school accommodated only 12 years after its founding in 1896, though today it operates as a high school-level institution, offering courses from grades 9-12.

A recent posting on the St. George’s official web site boasted that the “grandfather of our 43rd President” was an alumnus of the school, as if that were to lend further credibility to the Bush school myth. [18]

Today, the school offers a matriculation program with ties to 57 colleges and universities.

Prescott Bush’s numerous biographies mention his graduation from Yale University in 1917, though there is no mention of a degree. Before his graduation from Yale, yet another anomaly appears—his enlistment into the Connecticut National Guard in 1916.

The conflicting dates do not end there. While on a tour of duty in the U.S. Army from 1917-1919, Bush is credited, on August 8, 1918, with “deflecting an incoming shell with a bolo knife” and saving the lives of three allied leaders. As a result for his bravery, he “received the Cross of the Legion of Honor (from France), the Victorian Cross (from England) and the Distinguished Medal of Honor (from the U.S.” Upon his return to Columbus, Ohio, in mid-1919, Bush found it difficult to explain away the concocted “war hero” story (another anomaly) and “moved to St. Louis.” [19]

Still, another story surfaced regarding Prescott Bush’s whereabouts during 1918. Having been initiated into Yale University’s secret Skull and Bones Society (some say in 1916, others claim it was in 1917), Prescott Sheldon Bush is credited with the grave robbery of the skull of Geronimo, from a graveyard near Fort Sill, Oklahoma. Though this story may only be another myth, by now it has become quite difficult to distinguish PSB biographical fact from fiction. The overlapping timelines of these stories are enough to raise a few valid questions:

• Where and to whom was Prescott Sheldon Bush born?

• Why are there no official records of this monumental event?

• Where and when did he attend school?

• Where are his military records kept, or have they been conveniently “burned to create space in the National Archives” along with his father’s wartime business records?

Biographical accounts about Samuel P. Bush (SPB; Prescott’s father) claim that he was born at Brick Church, New Jersey.” [20] This information is supported by federal census declarations made by SPB himself. Fortunately, (for those who still seek the truth), there are two more records that show the flagrant deception (concealment) practiced by PSB. 

The 1920 U.S. Federal Decennial Census, taken in St. Louis, Missouri, documents a “Prescott S. Bush, age 24, general manager of a hardware company.” Biographical accounts describe GSH1/PSB’s position as a “warehouse clerk” and not as a “general manager of a hardware store”. GSH1/PSB stated that his father’s place of birth was “New York.”  [21]

The 1930 U.S. Federal Decennial Census documented the family of “Prescott S. Bush, age 34.” When asked where his father was born, he replied, “Massachusetts.” [22]

Even the Federal government’s own Census Bureau failed to recognize this inconsistency. How is it that a 24-year-old Yale University graduate (then again a decade later as a 34-year-old banker in New York City) could be so confused about his father’s birthplace?

If SPB was not PSB’s real father, that would explain everything. Nevertheless, the two statements appear to be blatant lies, not innocent mistakes. The Bush family biographies do nothing to rectify this dichotomy.

 

Read Full Report  Here

Updated excerpt from Codex Alimentarius — The End of Health Freedom 

Available Here

 

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post

In several of my recent articles, I have discussed the problems of using “risk assessment” methodology in the evaluation of both vitamin and mineral supplements and Genetically Modified (GM) food. I have also discussed at length the dangers of the Codex Alimentarius and U.S. Food and Drug Administration position on GM food which is known as “substantial equivalence” and, in its more extreme forms, “substantial similarity.”

However, another concern addressed by the Codex Guidelines has to deal with antibiotic resistance created through the process of genetic engineering. Yet, as is typical of any Codex Alimentarius presentation, the agency makes several misleading and unsettling statements in this regard as well. While Codex does state that methods should be used that do not result in antibiotic resistance, it qualifies that claim in its document “Foods Derived From Modern Biotechnology,” by stating that these methods should be used “where such technologies are available and demonstrated to be safe.”[1] This is certainly no mandate. It is merely a suggestion that will most likely be completely ignored by industry.

The Guidelines then go on to say that “Gene transfer from plants and their food products to gut micro-organisms or human cells is considered a rare possibility because of the many complex and unlikely events that would need to occur consecutively.”[2] This statement stands in direct contradiction to established science.[3] Indeed, the series of events that would have to transpire in order for the transfer of modified genes from a plant to human DNA or cells are neither unlikely nor rare.
In a footnote to this statement, Codex makes the claim “In cases where there are high levels of naturally occurring bacteria that are resistant to the antibiotic, the likelihood of such bacteria transferring the resistance to other bacteria will be orders of magnitude higher than the likelihood of transfer between ingested foods and bacteria.”[4] Yet while this may in fact be true the statement is still misleading. The issue being discussed in the footnoted statement is the likelihood of DNA transfer from GM plants to humans. Furthermore, if such events were so unlikely, why would it be important not to use antibiotic resistant gene technology in the future?

Another concern presented in the section of “Foods Derived From Moderin Biotechnology” dealing with GM plants is the question of potential allergens being created within the food products as well as the introduction of entirely new allergens that have never before existed in nature.

While Codex claims that “all newly expressed proteins” as well as “a protein new to the food supply” should be tested for safety, there are legitimate questions as to whether or not Codex has the ability or the desire to test for such possibilities. [5]

First, while it is quite possible to know what foods occurring naturally are allergenic, it is much more difficult to come to these conclusions about new substances or proteins. This is partly due to the fact that naturally occurring materials have so many millions of years of history and use which, in itself, tends to naturally weed out the allergenic foods from the non-allergenic ones in a population’s diet. GM products do not have this history.

Indeed, the idea that over time a population tends to form its own guidelines through natural process adds to the ease in which scientific inquiry may form knowledge of the food properties in relation to the population itself. Again, this is not the case with GM food.

Read Full Article Here

************************************************************************************************************************

Codex Alimentarius and GM Food Guidelines, Pt. 8

Updated excerpt from Codex Alimentarius — The End of Health Freedom

 

Available Here

 

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post

In the course of the recent article series I have written regarding Codex Alimentarius and its position on Genetically Modified (GM) food, I have criticized both the “risk assessment” method of GM food evaluation as well as the official position of Codex Alimentarius in regards to the “substantial equivalence” standards. I have also written about the very real possibility of the introduction of new allergens and antibiotic resistant bacteria into the general food supply.

However, up to this point, all of the problems with the Codex Guidelines mentioned have been in relation to the section of the Codex GM position document known as “Foods Derived From Modern Biotechnology,” which focuses on GM plants.

There are, accordingly, two more sections – one dealing with GM Micro-Organisms and the other dealing with GM animals.

However, while it may seem that the majority of criticism expressed thus far focuses more attention on the first section (GM plants), the fact is that all three sections are very similar in their language and directives, with only a few changes in the wording made to apply to the new topic.

In many of these sections the language is word for word, copied and pasted to reiterate the same purpose as the first section. Therefore, I will not repeat my criticisms of the second and third sections that have appeared in my criticism of the GM Plants section. Suffice to say that all of the problems existing in the GM Plant section exist in the GM Micro-Organism and GM Animal sections as well, namely those of questionable scientific practices, the ignoring of relevant data, and so on. This claim is easily verifiable by reading the Guidelines document cited in the footnotes.

With that said, some attention should be paid to the section entitled, “Guideline For The Conduct Of Food Safety Assessment Of Foods Produced Using Recombinant-DNA Micro-Organisms.” This section deals mainly with bacteria, yeasts, and certain types of fungi in their uses in food production.

While making many of the same admissions present in the GM plant Guidelines, one of the most startling statements made regarding GM micro-organisms is the admission that they can in fact survive digestion.

Codex says, “In some processed foods, they [GM micro-organisms] can survive processing and ingestion and can compete and, in some cases, be retained in the intestinal environment for significant periods of time.”[1]

While this statement is not revolutionary, it is quite surprising to see it uttered by Codex Alimentarius, an organization that seems to go to great lengths to approve GM products.

Nevertheless, the fact that these micro-organisms can survive digestion is extremely important to the GMO safety debate. So are the questions of rDNA retention in the intestinal tract, the potential for changing the intestinal flora of those consuming the GM product, and the subsequent effects on the immune system.

These are all concerns that Codex tacitly admits the existence of, simply by acknowledging the need to test them.[2] Yet the tendency of GM micro-organisms to survive digestion and begin to change the makeup of the human intestines is mentioned later, in a footnote, where it is stated quite openly,

Permanent life-long colonization by ingested micro-organisms is rare. Some orally administered micro-organisms have been recovered in feces or in the colonic mucosa weeks after feeding ceased. Whether the genetically modified micro-organism is established in the gastrointestinal tract or not, the possibility remains that it might influence the microflora or the mammalian host.[3]

It should be noted that the idea that “life-long colonization by ingested micro-organisms is rare”[4] is highly contested by many independent scientists.[5] Yet, even if one were to assume the truth of Codex’s statement, the fact that it is rare means that it is still possible. More importantly, the statement admits that, even without long-term residence in the intestinal tract, there is still the distinct possibility that it will still significantly affect the intestinal flora and likewise the host itself.

Still more obviously biased concerns exist in the subsection dealing with the information that should be provided on each of the DNA modifications or micro-organisms. This information is, for the most part, very basic. It contains such data as which genes are added, the number of insertion sites, etc. However, two sources of information that are required to be included cause some concern.

The first is the inclusion of the “identification of any open reading frames within inserted DNA or created by the modifications to contiguous DNA in the chromosome or in a plasmid, including those that could result in fusion proteins.”[6]

The second is the “particular reference to any sequences known to encode, or to influence the expression of, potentially harmful functions.”[7]

Yet, both of these expressions (fusion proteins and genes that express harmful functions) are considered potentially dangerous even under the weak Codex standards. These expressions refer to the ability of some proteins to fuse with other proteins of the same and other species, mutating the DNA of the species, or forcing it to produce potentially adverse effects. Neither of these characteristics should be present in food, yet Codex mandates only that they be reported, not removed, as a result of the testing. This appears to be a continual thread of Codex’s Guidelines.

Thus, Codex continues by saying that additional information should be provided

to demonstrate whether the arrangement of the modified genetic material has been conserved or whether significant rearrangements have occurred after the introduction to the cell and propagation of the recombinant strain to the extent needed for its use(s) in food production, including those that may occur during its storage according to current techniques;[8]

as well as

to demonstrate whether deliberate modifications made to the amino acid sequence of the expressed protein result in changes in its post-translational modification or affect sites critical for its structure or function;[9]

While reporting information related to the instances above might seem like a good idea (and certainly few would argue that it isn’t), simple reporting is not enough. Indeed, these issues, as well as the others mentioned in this section of the Guidelines, are related directly to the question of the stability of genetically modified organisms. This is mentioned briefly in this section of the Guidelines, most notably in a footnote where it says,

Microbial genes are more fluid than those of higher eukaryotes; that is, the organisms grow faster, adapt to changing environments, and are more prone to change. Chromosomal rearrangements are common. The general genetic plasticity of micro-organisms may affect recombinant DNA in micro-organisms and must be considered in evaluating the stability of recombinant DNA micro-organisms.[10]

It is clear that GM organisms are often dangerously unstable. Many of them carry genes that overproduce a certain characteristic, cannot be turned off, or simply begin to change even after it has been bonded to the new strain of DNA.

Yet, with all of these admissions by Codex as to the dangers that GM micro-organisms pose to those who consume them as well as the fact that GM DNA is often unpredictable, the Codex Guidelines recommendations for testing suggest that these micro-organisms should be assessed based upon tests conducted on the conventional counterpart, not the micro-organism itself.

If tests conclude that the questionable micro-organisms are removed or rendered non-toxic in their individual and natural states, then “viability and residence of micro-organisms in the alimentary system need no examination.”[11]

Read Full Article Here

*************************************************************************************************************************

Codex Alimentarius and GM Food Guidelines, Pt. 9

Updated excerpt from Codex Alimentarius — The End of Health Freedom 

Available Here

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post

In my last article entitled, “Codex Alimentarius and GM Food Guidelines Pt.8”, I detailed the Codex Alimentarius position regarding Genetically Modified (GM) Micro-Organisms. Similarly, in several of the articles I have written recently, I have also discussed the Codex position on GM plants and other GM organisms.

Yet, no analysis of the Codex Alimentarius positions on GM food and/or organisms would be complete without a discussion of the Codex position on GM animals.

Indeed, the “Guideline For The Conduct Of Food Safety Assessment Of Foods Derived From Recombinant-DNA Animals,” a subsection of the Codex document “Foods Derived From Modern Biotechnology,” is as interesting for the concerns that it does not address as for the ones that it does. Largely a copied and pasted version of the two sections before it, (“Guideline for the conduct of food safety assessment of foods derived from recombinant-dna plants” and “Guideline for the conduct of food safety assessment Of foods produced using recombinant-dna micro-organisms”) the GM animal Guidelines does not address some very key issues such as:

1.) Animal welfare
2.) Ethical, moral and socio-economic aspects
3.) Environmental risks related to the environmental release of recombinant-DNA animals used in food production
4.) The safety of recombinant-DNA animals used as feed, or the safety of animals fed with feed derived from recombinant-DNA animals, plants and micro-organisms.[1]

As can be easily seen, these issues are extremely important in their own right. Just the moral issues, in addition to the hazards of the potential of GM animals being released into the environment, are enough to fill volumes. However, Codex chooses not to deal with these issues in its Guidelines.
With that being said, because Codex treats GM animals essentially the same as GM plants, there is very little difference in the guidelines. This shows a lack of scientific zeal as animals are fundamentally different than plants.

Yet one area where Codex does address a different aspect of the GM safety question is related to veterinary drug residues. It says,

Some recombinant-DNA animals may exhibit traits that may result in the potential for altered accumulation or distribution of xenobiotics (e.g. veterinary drug residues, metals), which may affect food safety. Similarly, the potential for altered colonization by and shedding of human pathogens or new symbiosis with toxin-producing organisms in the recombinant-DNA animal could have an effect on food safety.[2]

With its implicit admission of the instability of modified genes, Codex now also admits that these genes, when changed in animals, could affect the distribution and retention of veterinary drugs and other substances which would necessarily change the content of the food product derived from that animal. As Codex states, this same situation could also apply to human pathogens as well as veterinary drugs.

As a side note, it appears that 2007-2008 was a very beneficial year for GMO food producers. Not only were the pro-GM testing Guidelines approved by Codex, but many countries, such as the European Union who had been opposed to the introduction of GM food up to this point, began changing their position to one that was slightly more open to GMO.

For instance, in 2008, Codex Alimentarius approved Guidelines that would allow low levels of GM products that have not been approved by the countries’ regulatory agencies inside products that are imported into the country. This would include products like grain, corn, and oats. Codex claims that this set of standards merely recognizes the fact that GM products will inadvertently mix with non-GM products during processing and transportation and that it means to provide guidance in this unavoidable situation.[3]

However, this presupposes that GM contamination of food shipments is unavoidable when in fact just the opposite is the case. If GM products were not used to begin with, the entire issue would not need to be addressed.

Read Full Article Here

950:
“State executive agency for carrying out eugenical sterilization”
Date:
Circa 1935
Pages:1 of 1
Source:
The Harry H. Laughlin Papers, Truman State University, Lantern Slides, Black Case,Section 12

View this image in our new website.

&quote;State executive agency for carrying out eugenical sterilization&quote;

Copyright 1999-2004: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory; American Philosophical Society; Truman State University; Rockefeller Archive Center/Rockefeller University; University of Albany, State University of New York; National Park Service, Statue of Liberty National Monument; University College, London; International Center of Photography; Archiv zur Geschichte der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, Berlin-Dahlem; and Special Collections, University of Tennessee, Knoxville.
The images and text in this Archive are solely for educational and scholarly uses. The materials may be used in digital or print form in reports, research, and other projects that are not offered for sale. Materials in this archive may not be used in digital or print form by organizations or commercial concerns, except with express permission.

25 Billion People Makes Case for Global Sterilization Program

Does Global Elite have Master Plan to Reduce Population to a Managed Equilibrium?

Current Economic System Unable to Distribute Resources Properly in the coming 22nd Century New World Order

by Johnny Punish

Veterans Today

Today, my friend in India told me that the government is instituting a plan to make sure everyone installs a box on their TV so that they can monitor their behavior and install an entertainment tax. Entertainment Tax? That’s crazy! My first thought was how desperate was his government that they had to deploy this repressive tax.

Well, it turns out that India is desperate.  They are grappling with over population and how to distribute resources.  So they put up silly crazy taxes like this Entertainment Tax to try and pay for it.  But it is just trying to stop a coming flood with Silly Putty;  in the end, it’s too late.  It won’t work!  There is nothing under the current economic system that will stop the coming hell from visiting us. Here me out!

30 years ago, India was more free. The government was less involved.  There were less people.  Today, they provide controlled cooking gas canisters to the people and shut of the electricity at various times because there just isn’t enough to go around. And don’t get me started on clean water.

With the population of India currently over 1.2 billion people and growing fast. With a developing consumer market that is seeing the creation of many new super rich and an unseemly fast growing super poor, the divide is becoming more clear. And what is worse, the population is expected to hit 2 billion by 2050.

There is simply not enough resources to deal with this population. Let me rephrase that….under our current global capitalist system of resource distribution, there is not enough resources to deal with this population. In short, the rich will get theirs but the poor are out of luck.

Now expand this challenge to the other population exploding areas where resources are already on the edge and we about to enter a new era of human existence.

In short, right now we have 7 billion people on our planet. By 2050, experts agree that we are going to be around 10-12 billion and by 2100 that number could reach 25 billion. But hold on….25 billion people? Can that really happen?

Under our system we have a ruling elite class of people in global finance and global political leadership folks that are fully aware of this population challenge. Some call them the Bilderberger Group; or Bilderbergers. Whomever they are, rest assured that they derive their power from our monetary economic system that is current in place and they will collective aim to insure that this unequal system of resource distribution continues forward.

Read Full Article  and  Watch Videos Here

*************************************************************************************************

Professor of Anthropology

Jonathan Marks

Jonathan Marks
Department of Anthropology
UNC-Charlotte
email: jmarks@uncc.edu
phone: (704) 687-2519
fax: (704) 687-3209

The Eugenics Page

During the first few decades of this century, the most influential geneticist in America was Charles B. Davenport. He taught at Harvard until 1899, and then moved to the University of Chicago briefly, before founding the Carnegie Institution’s genetics and evolution laboratories at Cold Spring Harbor on Long Island. Shortly thereafter, he persuaded Mrs. E. H. Harriman, widow of a railroad tycoon, to endow a Eugenics Record Office at Cold Spring Harbor as well.

According to Davenport, in his major work, Heredity in Relation to Eugenics (1911),

“The general program of the eugenicist is clear — it is to improve the race by inducing young people to make a more reasonable selection of marriage mates; to fall in love intelligently. It also includes the control by the state of the propagation of the mentally incompetent. It does not imply the destruction of the unfit either before or after birth.”

Falling in love intelligently is, of course, harder than it may sound. And who are the “mentally incompetent” and “unfit”? According to Davenport, it was obvious. They were the people who had the broadly distributed genes for “feeblemindedness”. The genotype could be easily diagnosed from the phenotype, and indicated a general atavistic, non-human nature:

“The acts of taking and keeping loose articles, of tearing away obstructions to get at something desired, of picking valuables out of holes and pockets, of assaulting a neighbor who has something desirable or who has caused pain or who is in the way, of deserting family and other relatives, of promiscuous sexual relations — these are crimes for a twentieth-century citizen but they are the normal acts of our remote, ape-like ancestors and (excepting the last) they are so common with infants that we laugh when they do such things. In a word the traits of the feeble-minded and the criminalistic are normal traits for infants and for an earlier stage in man’s evolution.”

The plan of the eugenics movement was that since the poor had these genes for feeblemindedness, which led them to misery, vice, and crime, the obvious solution to American social problems was to sterilize them, and restrict the immigration of more poor.

Davenport’s friend Madison Grant was a wealthy New York lawyer, Yale graduate (1887), and an ardent amateur naturalist. He had helped to found the New York Zoological Society, and introduced the eugenic ideals to mass audience in his best-selling The Passing of the Great Race (1916). Grant built on Davenport’s genetics to produce a master plan for ending crime and poverty, along with a calculus for emptying the jails and balancing the budget.

“A rigid system of selection through the elimination of those who are weak or unfit — in other words social failures — would allow solve the whole question in one hundred years, as well as enable us to get rid of the undesirables who crowd our jails, hospitals, and insane asylums. The individual himself can be nourished, educated and protected by the community during his lifetime, but the state through sterilization must see to it that his line stops with him, or else future generations will be cursed with an ever increasing load of misguided sentimentalism. This is a practical, merciful, and inevitable solution of the whole problem, and can be applied to an ever widening circle of social discards, beginning always with the criminal, the diseased, and the insane, and extending gradually to types which may be called weaklings rather than defectives, and perhaps ultimately to worthless race types.”

Eliminate the social failures, says Grant.
Kill all the nerds?
Sterilize the social discards and then the worthless race types! says Grant. Oh, but wait — if they’re not worthy of propagation, why are they worthy of life?
Details.
These ideas resonated with a wide spectrum of people from all political backrounds. After all, it was scientific! Grant’s book was praised by his friend, former president Theodore Roosevelt, who wrote: “The book is a capital book: in purpose, in vision, in grasp of the facts that our people must need to realize…. It is the work of an American scholar and gentleman, and all Americans should be grateful to you for writing it.” Much depends, obviously, on how one interprets words like “elimination” and “worthless race types”. The Passing of the Great Race was translated into German in 1925, and Grant received a fan letter from aspiring politician Adolf Hitler as well: “The book is my Bible,” wrote Hitler to Grant.

It would be nice to think there were relatively few things Theodore Roosevelt and Adolf Hitler agreed upon, but this was one. It was a scientific, modern solution to social problems.
Meanwhile, back in the US, Charles Davenport had hired Harry Laughlin as his right-hand man to run the Eugenics Record Office. Laughlin testified for Congress about the poor germ-plasm of the immigrants from southern and eastern Europe, during the hearings which culminated in the Johnson Bill, restricting immigration in 1924. He also testified before the Supreme Court, in Buck v. Bell (1927), in which Virginia’s right to sterilize a poor woman involuntarily was upheld. The majority decision, written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., used the most modern opinions of science to render a verdict.

“It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from breeding their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting Fallopian tubes. . . Three generations of imbeciles are enough.”

The interesting aspect of the eugenics movement is that it was mainstream science. The Passing of the Great Race was reviewed favorably in the journal Science, by MIT geneticist Frederick Adams Woods. Every genetics textbook of the era advanced the case of eugenics, showing how genetics could be used to solve social problems, if we simply believe everything geneticists say, give them lots of money, and not worry too much about individual civil rights, and the poor training and track record of geneticists in that area.

Thus, the first edition of Principles of Genetics can talk very casually about people whose stock ought to be eliminated on the basis of their contributions to society. The senior author, Edward Sinnott, became a professor at Columbia, and later, dean of the Yale Graduate School. The junior author, Leslie C. Dunn, also became a professor at Columbia, and became an outspoken critic of racist biology after the Nazis came to power. This passage (and the entire chapter it is from) does not appear in the editions that followed the stock market crash and the Depression, when it suddenly became clear to geneticists that wealth wasn’t necessarily a good indicator of genotype.

Geneticists were slow to get it. Many, of course, believed it; they came from the privileged classes and shared the cultural prejudices of the era. Others may not have agreed with Madison Grant or Charles Davenport, but didn’t disagree with them publicly. In fact, during the heyday of the eugenics movement, virtually every geneticist of note served below Grant and Davenport on the Advisory Board of the American Eugenics Society. (Alongside Madison Grant, as it were, Henry E. Crampton was a paleontologist, Fisher an economist, Laughlin a geneticist, Little a geneticist—who founded modern mouse genetics in America— Olson a judge, Roswell H. Johnson a geologist, Davenport a geneticist, and Fairchild a sociologist.  Obviously it was a broad intellectual movement, that believed in genetics!).  One notable exception among the geneticists was Thomas Hunt Morgan, from Columbia University, who worked in the same building as anthropologist Franz Boas, a tireless critic of eugenics. Morgan published some polite reservations about eugenics in the mid-1920s, but not enough either to piss anyone off or to allow people to invoke his prestige to repudiate the movement. In the mid-1920s the only critics of eugenics were non-scientists or soft scientists, like Boas and Clarence Darrow, a great defender of civil liberties. Darrow evolved from biology’s champion at the Scopes trial in 1925 to biology’s basher in 1926.

The Nazi Eugenics Program Never Stopped

DiscloseTruthTVDiscloseTruthTV

Published on Dec 20, 2012

Investigative reporter Jon Rappoport warned of alarming future trends in the genetic engineering of human beings. Based on his contacts with several scientists over a period of 20 years, he’s concluded that human genetics research is basically a continuation of the Nazi eugenics program, and that medical research into genes as causes of human illness is simply a cover story.

Part of this secret agenda, he detailed, is to demonstrate that people have genetic predispositions to certain diseases like cancer, so in the case of lawsuits, this argument can be made rather than placing blame for illness on environmental factors like pollution. In citing the book Remaking Eden, Rappoport noted that author Lee Silver foresees a time when the “gen-rich” (genetically enhanced class) will account for 10% of the population, while “naturals” will work as low paid service providers/laborers.

Eventually, the gen-rich class and the naturals will become entirely separate species, with no ability to crossbreed, Silver continued, adding that the trend for genetic enhancement was inevitable. Rappoport had no doubt that some of this research was already underway, possibly under compartmentalized lab studies, so that scientists don’t even realize the significance of what they’re working on. “The best thing that could happen,” he stated, “is that recognized doctors and researchers stand up together, and say, this has to stop.”

Biography:

Jon Rappoport has worked as an investigative reporter for 20 years, and is the author of five books. He has written on medical fraud, deep politics, and health issues for newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe, including CBS Healthwatch, Spin, Stern and LA Weekly.The LA Weekly placed Jon’s name in nomination for a Pulitzer Prize, for his interview with the president of Salvador University, where a military takeover had occurred.

Wikipedia
Nazi eugenics were Nazi Germany’s racially-based social policies that placed the improvement of the Aryan race through eugenics at the center of Nazis ideology. Those humans were targeted who were identified as “life unworthy of life” (German: Lebensunwertes Leben), including but not limited to the criminal, degenerate, dissident, feeble-minded, homosexual, idle, insane, and the weak, for elimination from the chain of heredity. More than 400,000 people were sterilized against their will, while 70,000 were killed under Action T4, a “euthanasia” program

After the eugenics movement was well established in the United States, it was spread to Germany. California eugenicists began producing literature promoting eugenics and sterilization and sending it overseas to German scientists and medical professionals.[3] By 1933, California had subjected more people to forceful sterilization than all other U.S. states combined. The forced sterilization program engineered by the Nazis was partly inspired by California’s

Hitler’s views on eugenics

Adolf Hitler read racial hygiene tracts during his imprisonment in Landsberg Prison. He thought that Germany could become strong again only if the state applied the principles of racial hygiene and eugenics to German society.

Alexa Traffic Rank for http://iml.jou.ufl.edu/projects/Spring02/Holland/Galton.htm: 5,701iml.jou.ufl.edu/projects

The science of eugenics was invented by Sir Francis Galton, an amateur British scientist. The term eugenics was coined by Galton in 1883, though he had been doing research and writing in the field for some time before then. Galton also did research in several scientific fields including geography, meteorology and anthropology.
Galton was the cousin of Charles Darwin and the son of a wealthy, influential family. In 1869 Galton wrote a book called Heredity Genius in which he followed the lives of several accomplished men from, what he considered good families. These good families, Galton claimed, were more likely to produce intelligent and talented offspring.Galton concluded that it was possible to produce “a highly gifted race of men” by the process of selective breeding, which he later termed “positive” eugenics. Discouraging the reproduction of “undesirables” was subsequently termed “negative” eugenics. (Dolan)The “negative” eugenics movement was much stronger than the “positive” eugenics and swept across the U.S.

************************************************************************************************

Published on Jan 30, 2013

~Unslave Humanity Tactical Media: http://whynotnews.eu/?p=2078 ~credits video-edit: Anthony Bacala III http://goo.gl/Hq0Ay “Over the last week I have witnessed an ongoing trend on duality, this time around with guns at the forefront of the debate. After some inner searching, I have come to two conclusions.The government has us right where they want us, yet again, getting our blood boiling and our weapons and ammunition stocked up. While I fully support the right to bear arms, I am seeing a deeper agenda at work.”

[quote]

***PLEASE READ*** The recent conspiracies are but a single pixel in the big picture!If these recent events have woken you up to the fact that something’s not right in the world today, it’s time to take a look at how we can change things. Peacefully. Without a single drop of blood shed.Let’s regain our sovereignty! Power to the people, not the corrupt!We shall overcome!***An updated after posting this video***When I made this video it was merely to spark a connection with centuries old plans to bring society down, and a manner in which one country fought this peacefully.While the exact steps may not work here, the principle will.Recent controversies are waking people up, but this can be scary when they realize, “Whoa, the real reality is kind of a shit-storm right now.”I merely wanted them to realize that the problems they are facing, and even the potentials on the horizon have been documented and in gear for quite a long time.Also, I do not wish to see any sort of civil war breakout, or have any unnecessary blood shed on American soil. I am aware by even putting this video out, I am now falling into the category of a “low level terrorist,” but I am also placing myself in the category of a “high level patriot.”I wish to see peace, as most of the citizens do.I have two members of my family that have been forced to kill in order to protect themselves and those around them serving the police and Marines. I know that these actions have plagued their minds and hearts.We all want peace.We also don’t want the greedy to keep on stealing from us, as our livelihood is sucked down the drain.I am only 25, so I admit I have a lot to learn. However, I am wise enough to know that things need to be changed immediately.I have no political or religious affiliation. I was raised Catholic, and was even a confirmation sponsor three times. Our family missed mass less than 10 times from the time I was born until I was about 20. I am not going to go there, but I am just saying, I have walked that path and am aware of it.My point is, I am just seeking peace for this country. If that means speaking out against the corrupt, thus making me a potential criminal, I will not let it slow me down. I just want to spark a wave of awakening to the potentials for peaceful revolution throughout the globe. It is up to the people of each community to decide the manner in which they wish to bring this about.

[unquote]

Read more: http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvid…

Updated excerpt from Codex Alimentarius — The End of Health Freedom 

Available Here

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post

Over the last few weeks, I have written a number of articles dealing with the dangers of the methods of analyzing the risks of Genetically Modified (GM) food used by both Codex Alimentarius and the FDA known as “substantial equivalence/substantial similarity” and the “risk assessment methodology used in the evaluation process. In conjunction with the Codex document “Foods Derived From Modern Biotechnology,” the Codex position on the evaluation and labeling of GM food, I described the hypocrisy of Codex’s position towards vitamin and mineral supplements and its position in regards to GM food which is, interestingly enough, one hundred and eighty degrees different.

However, there are even more dangers to using the “substantial equivalence/substantial similarity” model in conjunction with the “risk assessment” evaluation methodology in terms of GM food.
Indeed, there exists a very real possibility that the Codex position on GM food as well as vitamin and mineral supplements will be used to develop a food system in which GM food is the only acceptable form of food allowed in the supply, while any other food may be removed from the market. In addition, it is entirely possible that once the standards are set by Codex and agreed upon by nations participating in the WTO, that foods containing high levels (or reasonable levels) of nutrition could be removed from the market simply on the basis of their high nutritional content.

For instance, the damage to the food supply does not end with the introduction of GM foods. In addition, because Codex standards are enforced by the WTO, the Maximum Permitted Levels for vitamin and minerals developed by Codex will remain in place.

So, because the risk assessment for GM food based on “substantial equivalence” will inevitably determine the GM food itself to be safe, the problem then becomes the nutritional value within the food.
The nutrition then becomes the enemy and must be removed.

While this might seem both improbable and impossible, it is, in fact, neither.

The seeming improbability of a Codex declaration of nutrients as toxins has already been realized and the genetic manipulation of the nutritional properties of food is not an impossibility at all.

While the cover story for the introduction of GM food often involves the alleged wish to bring about the end of malnutrition by increasing nutritional properties of the food genetically (a blatant contradiction if one accepts that nutrients should be treated as toxins), the ability to decrease nutrition through genetic modification is just as realistic.

We then have a situation where nutritionally deficient GM food is not only allowed, but required due to the “dangerous” amount of vitamins and minerals that exist in the natural food. Codex even admits later on in the Guidelines that nutrients will be focused on rather than the dangers of the GM food. It says,

To assess the safety of a food derived from a recombinant-DNA plant modified for a nutritional or health benefit, the estimated intake of the nutrient or related substance in the population(s) is compared with the nutritional or toxicological reference values, such as upper levels of intake, acceptable daily intakes (ADIs) for that nutrient or related substance.[1]

The question then is not the safety of the GM food, but of the amount of vitamins and nutrients included in it.

Continuing through the Guidelines, such a statement is cleverly made. It says, “Rather than trying to identify every hazard associated with a particular food, the intention of a safety assessment of food derived from recombinant-DNA is the identification of new or altered hazards relative to the conventional counterpart.”[2] Not only is this an extremely limiting set of standards for assessing the safety of the product, what is actually meant by “hazard”, although not explicitly stated, is nutrients.

This is made even clearer in the next paragraph which states, “Upper levels of intake for many nutrients that have been set out by some national, regional and international bodies may be considered, as appropriate. The basis for their derivation should also be considered in order to assess the public health implications of exceeding these levels.”[3] Clearly, nutrients are the focus of much of the risk assessment methods applied to GM food.

This may initially cause some GM food products to be rejected by Codex due to the higher level of nutritional properties being produced. That is, until the food is modified once again to have a lower nutritional value. When seen in this light, it becomes obvious that many of the Codex Guidelines are intertwined with one another. However, none are more important than those related to vitamins, minerals, and nutrients.

 

Read Full Article Here

Updated excerpt from Codex Alimentarius — The End of Health Freedom 

Available Here

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post

In my last article, “Codex Alimentarius and GM Food Guidelines Pt.4,” I discussed a tangible, real-world example of the results of using “substantial equivalence” or “substantial similarity” when assessing the dangers of Genetically Modified (GM) food and/or approving that food for the market.

Returning to the defining Codex document in relation to GM food, “Food Derived From Modern Biotechnology,” it should be noted that the risks associated with GMOs are dealt with in a rather curious manner. Indeed, the monitoring and management of risks from GM food after their approval is mentioned rather blandly in the introductory section of the Guidelines. It says,

Post market-monitoring may be undertaken for the purpose of:

A.) Verifying conclusions about the absence or the possible occurrence, impact and significance of potential consumer health effects; and

B.) Monitoring changes in nutrient intake levels, associated with the introduction of foods likely to alter nutritional status significantly, to determine their human health impact. [1]

It should be noted that these are issues which should be resolved in a scientific setting prior to market. Yet Codex is obviously content to allow the public to act as lab rats in the real world rather than force these side effects to be addressed in an actual lab. Absolute disregard for the global population is evident here.

As will be discussed in future articles, when one understands the ultimate purpose of Codex Alimentarius, it becomes clear as to why policies like this emanate from the organization. Such is also the case when Codex mentions the management of risks finding their way into the market and the need for post-market tracing for the purpose of recall.[2] It is important to note that tracing food materials is a difficult task, especially if those products have already found their way into the environment and have begun to reproduce.
Regardless, the second chapter of Codex’s “Foods Derived From Modern Biotechnology” makes what should be considered a revelatory admission. It says,

The Codex principles of risk analysis, particularly those for risk assessment, are primarily intended to apply to discrete chemical entities, such as food additives and pesticide residues, or a specific chemical or microbial contaminant that have identifiable hazards and risks; they are not intended to apply to whole foods as such.[3]

Essentially, this is an admission that risk assessment methodology is absolutely incapable and inappropriate when dealing with the safety of a whole food. As Codex makes clear, the principles for risk assessment were never intended to address anything other than chemicals and additives.

However, one should remember that risk assessment is indeed the method used to determine the safety of vitamins, nutrients, and minerals by Codex Alimentarius in order to label them unsafe at unreasonably low levels.

But Codex continues with even further admission that the testing methods used are not nearly as intense as one might think. The document reads,

Traditionally, new varieties of food plants have not been systematically subjected to extensive chemical, toxicological or nutritional evaluation prior to marketing, with the exception of foods for specific groups, such as infants, where the food may constitute a substantial portion of the diet. Thus, new varieties of corn, soybean, potatoes and other common food plants are evaluated by breeders for agronomic and phenotypic characteristics, but generally, foods derived from such new plant varieties are not subjected to the rigorous and extensive food safety testing procedures, including studies in animals, that are typical of chemicals, such as food additives or pesticide residues, that may be present in food.[4]

Simply put, Codex is admitting, albeit cleverly, that the testing method for whole foods is inadequate, and that the testing itself is not nearly as extensive as it would be for evaluating a known toxin like a chemical, pesticide, or apparently, vitamins and minerals.

As related to Codex’s position on vitamins and minerals, Codex considers genetically modified foods that have been engineered to produce a deadly chemical or pesticide to be a whole food, but vitamin C is considered a toxin.

Yet Codex does not stop here with the prefacing of their intended deceit and the admission of flawed and manipulated science. It says,

Animal studies cannot be readily applied to testing the risks associated with whole foods, which are complex mixtures of compounds, often characterized by a wide variation in composition and nutritional value. Owing to their bulk and effect on satiety, they can usually only be fed to animals at low multiples of the amounts that might be present in the human diet. In addition, a key factor to consider in conducting animal studies on foods is the nutritional value and balance of the diets used; this is in order to avoid the induction of adverse effects that are not related directly to the material itself. Detecting any potential adverse effects and relating these conclusively to an individual characteristic of the food can, therefore, be extremely difficult. If the characterization of the food indicates that the available data are insufficient for a thorough safety assessment, properly designed animal studies could be requested on the whole foods. Another consideration in deciding the need for animal studies is whether it is appropriate to subject experimental animals to such a study if it is unlikely to give rise to meaningful information.[5]

But there are several problems with this statement.

First, let it be made clear that this writer does not support the use of animals for laboratory testing for any reason.

However, this issue is not the focus of this article and it will be repeatedly referred to in its proper context in terms of scientific debate.

That being said, what Codex has admitted to in this statement, albeit subtly, is that test subjects will actually be fed significantly less of the GM food in question than exists in the standard human diet. Nowhere does Codex mention that the amount fed to the test subjects can be adjusted per capita, but simply that the amount fed to them will be “at low multiples of the amounts that might be present in the human diet.”[6]

Furthermore, Codex attempts to convince the reader that because of differences in nutritional values and diet balance in the animals being tested it is extremely difficult to determine if there are any adverse effects resulting from the material being tested or another material/condition. Hence, Codex would have the reader believe that this problem could not be solved by the addition of a control group.

In the end, the overall conclusion of Codex is that testing GM foods is largely unproductive and that, for the most part, it should only be conducted in very special circumstances. Mere post-market tracking is looked upon as the most favorable route. This, however, leaves the consumer as the test subject, and corrective action can only be taken after it is too late for hundreds, thousands, or even millions of people.

Codex furthers this claim with an admission of its acceptance of “substantial equivalence” as a testing standard. Because of the problems associated with using risk assessment to address dangers in whole foods (but evidently not nutrients and vitamins), Codex claims it must rely on substantial equivalence to address intended and unintended changes in the food. Hence, Codex officially accepts the concept. [7]

 

Read  Full Article Here

The Art of Resistance

Reblogged from akkaoldfart:

Click to visit the original post

Rebel of Oz – March 15, 2013

This is my eighth year as a full time Internet activist. The longer I’m fighting this “War on Evil”, the more I’m concerned with the effectiveness of resistance. No matter what our cause, liberty, false-flag terrorism, free Palestine, debt-free currency, New World Order, Illuminati, chemtrails, vaccination, cancer cures, drug prohibition, or historic revisionism, we must first and foremost make a conscience decision about what’s more important to us, being right or resisting effectively.

Read more… 212 more words

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 709 other followers