“Should we accept everything they say as true? Probably not.” Those are the words of CNN Pentagon Correspondent Chris Lawrence, talking about the accounts of Guantánamo Bay (Gitmo) detainees, in documents released by WikiLeaks starting on April 24. The documents contain startling amounts of intelligence about failed or rejected al-Qaida plots. So why does Lawrence tell us not to take every word at face value?
Because it’s all probably bunk, made up to avoid torture.
“The documents draw on the testimony of witnesses — in most cases, the prisoners’ fellow prisoners — whose words are unreliable, either because they were subjected to torture or other forms of coercion (sometimes not in Guantánamo, but in secret prisons run by the CIA), or because they provided false statements to secure better treatment in Guantánamo,” WikiLeaks said.
So why would CNN (and plenty of other mainstream news outlets) run this story? Because Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the self-proclaimed “mastermind” behind the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, is one of the prisoners mentioned in the documents.
Mohammed claimed there were plans to attack the “tallest building in California” (and Washington state), destroy the Brooklyn bridge and blow up gas stations.
There was even a plot involving the use of Sega game cartridges as remote-controlled firing devices. I guess they don’t have the Wii in Afghanistan.
The release of all these documents — many of which refer to terror threats the Department of Homeland Security claims to have already handled — serves an interesting dual purpose.
On the one hand, the good guys caught the bad guys, and aren’t we so lucky that the government stopped so many terrorist plots? Isn’t it wonderful knowing we’re safe? Maybe we don’t need all those Constitutional rights after all.
But hold on — if these are the terrorists they caught, what about all those bad guys who are still out there?! We killed their boss; the terrorists are going to be really mad now. We need to pay these higher taxes — the Government needs more of my money to keep me safe.
George Orwell was right: “When memory failed and written records were falsified — when that happened, the claim of the Party to have improved the conditions of human life had got to be accepted, because there did not exist, and never again could exist, any standard against which it could be tested.”
Two private citizens and the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) have filed a Federal lawsuit challenging Illinois’ prohibition of the carrying of firearms for self-defense.
According to The Associated Press, Illinois residents Michael Moore of Champaign and Charles Hooks of Percy, along with the SAF, filed the suit on May 12, eight days after a measure that would have allowed residents to carry concealed weapons failed in the State Legislature. Moore is a former corrections officer and Hooks is a farmer, the news provider reported.
Illinois and Wisconsin are the only States that ban citizens from carrying concealed firearms for self-defense. However, SAF Vice President Alan Gottlieb asserted that Wisconsin at least allows its citizens to carry non-concealed weapons.
“Only Illinois makes it statutorily impossible for average private citizens to carry firearms for self-defense,” said Gottlieb. “Whether Illinois lawmakers like it or not, the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms is the law of the land.”
Gottlieb added that he was surprised that Illinois legislators have not acquiesced to last year’s Supreme Court ruling in McDonald v. Chicago, in which justices ruled that the 2nd Amendment applies to State and local governments.
The United States government has officially hit the debt ceiling limit, prompting the Treasury Department to undertake emergency measures in order to avoid the nation’s first-ever default.
On May 16, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told Congress that the government had reached its $14.3 trillion debt limit. He added that the Treasury would, among other measures, use Federal pension funds in order to make debt payments until early August.
Geithner urged lawmakers to increase the debt limit by Aug. 2 “to protect the full faith and credit of the United States and avoid catastrophic economic consequences for citizens,” according to media reports.
Speaking to financial executives at the Economic Club of Chicago on May 16, Representative Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) reiterated his party’s stance: A deal on raising the debt limit would have to be accompanied by significant spending cuts.
“For every dollar the president wants to raise the debt ceiling, we can show him plenty of ways to cut far more than a dollar of spending,” said Ryan, quoted by Reuters.
Last week, while speaking at the Economic Club of New York, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said that spending cuts should exceed the debt-ceiling increase granted by Congress. He emphasized that reductions should be “in the trillions of dollars, not billions.”
“They want what every first-term Administration wants — a second term.” — from the movie “Clear and Present Danger”
America hasn’t had a leader like President Barack Obama in generations. He is more shrewd than a Chicago mayor, more powerful than the Tea Party and able to read a teleprompter at a single glance. He is ObamaMan! Not since former President Harry Truman’s capture of former Prime Minister of Japan Hideki Tojo has the nation had such a “presidential” President.
The “interdiction” ordered against Osama bin Laden, aided by the best fighting force in the world, is sure to make Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize a footnote for some of his biographers. And depending on whom you listen to, the President has either eradicated Muslim extremism or set a course for democracy in the Middle East.
No doubt Hollywood producers are hoping Wesley Snipes will be released from jail so he can play the role of the commander in chief. Expect the screenplay to deviate from the truth. In the film version the President will probably overcome an army of Muslim bodyguards armed with AK-47s before kicking down a steel door and dealing with bin Laden mano a mano.
The true story is not nearly as engrossing. It is about a president desperate for reelection and seeking the spotlight for an American electorate who only glance at headlines.
But the question remains: Why did it take our government nearly a decade to kill the worst mass murderer of the 21st century? And why was our closest ally in the Middle East protecting him? In the final analysis, both Pakistan and the White House may have to answer for the medieval meltdown that is the Muslim world.
We are left watching The Barack Obama Tour, with visits by the President to Ground Zero, an hour-long interview on 60 Minutes and a jingoistic speech in front of America’s real patriots, the men who carried out the mission: the Navy SEAL assault force the President spoke to at Fort Campbell, Kentucky.
If you think I am wrong about Obama being an opportunist, consider what Gary D. Barnett wrote for The Daily Reckoning:
“There has never been such an opportunity for the U.S. government to stage a false flag event in order to start yet another war as there is today. The setup is obvious to Libertarians and some sane others, but it eludes most (sic) all Americans who are busy dancing in the street after the so-called killing of Osama bin Laden.
“Consider the timing of this attack by U.S. Navy SEALs, and then consider recent events. First, the economy is in shambles, unemployment is sky high, price inflation is excessive, and the U.S. military has been bombing civilians in an attempt to assassinate (Moammar) Gadhafi, including murdering innocent little children. Our money is being destroyed before our eyes. The wars are not going well for the ruling elite, and Obama’s ratings are horribly low at the beginning of his presidential crusade.
“What better reason then for an event to solidify the masses… ”
It is the dangerous masses, a growing Muslim mob that is becoming more belligerent to America each passing year. Arab governments collect billions of dollars from us while secretly supporting jihad when our backs are turned. What makes it all the more maddening is that a tidal wave of Arab hate created bin Laden and not the other way around.
More lives than a cat
According to the CBC TV program The Fifth Estate, there were nine previous attempts by the U.S. to kill or capture bin Laden before his death. They commenced with the Administration of former President Bill Clinton and finally succeeded this month. But should it take more than a decade and three Presidents to kill one man living next door to Pakistan’s version of West Point?
On more than one occasion, Pakistan’s government or security apparatus, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), tipped off bin Laden. That is a bad deal to U.S. taxpayers who have provided Pakistan with more than $10 billion since 9/11. Then again, bin Laden was a cash cow for the Pakistani government, which only feigned being his bounty hunter.
But that gravy train might soon be over, as announced by Senator Dianne Feinstein, the head of the Senate Intelligence Committee. The Democrat from California said that if it turns out the Pakistani government knew where bin Laden was hiding, Congress may cut $1.5 billion dollars in annual aid to Pakistan. That should have happened years ago, and the Obama Administration knows it.
The problem with PakiSatan, a Muslim power with more than 100 nuclear warheads, is its intelligence service and the government itself are corrupt — begging for money from the United States in a pretense to arrest extremism while at the same time providing aid and support to Islamic extremists. The evidence comes from the Pakistani government which first insisted it knew nothing of the planned assault, then claimed to have provided crucial intelligence for the raid on the compound.
Pakistan can’t have it both ways, or can it? The government of Pakistan even wants an apology from Washington for conducting a military operation on its soil to get bin Laden. So strained have relations between the two countries become that, on occasion, U.S. troops have had to engage Pakistani soldiers in firefights, and the Navy SEAL team was prepared to shoot its way out of Pakistan should it have to engage the enemy… I mean ally.
It is hard to know who America’s real friends are in the Muslim world, as many Islamists are outraged over the killing of bin Laden. They don’t understand our outrage, and I partially blame Obama for that. Obama was sympathetic to the mosque being built next to Ground Zero and shared his outrage over Pastor Terry Jones’ burning the Quran.
American troops are still falling in Afghanistan as the Obama Administration props up corrupt and unpopular Muslim leaders. These diplomatic failures will in the end far outweigh the killing of one aging terrorist.
While it is wonderful to have bin Laden dead, others are carrying the torch of hate. In the end, one dead Saudi isn’t going to pave a road to peace.
Yours in good times and bad,
Myers’ Energy & Gold Report
All pilots know this is an incredibly important week in aviation history. Leading the list was Charles A. Lindbergh’s solo flight across the Atlantic. It was a rainy morning on May 20, 1927, when Lindbergh took off from Long Island’s Roosevelt Field. He landed 33.5 hours later at Le Bourget field in Paris, France.
Lindbergh’s plane The Spirit of St. Louis carried so much fuel that it barely cleared the trees at the end of the runway when he took off for Paris at 7:52 a.m. But clear the trees he did and he remained airborne for 3,610 miles, averaging a mere 108 miles per hour. The flight made Lindberg an international hero.
Here’s an interesting footnote to that historic flight: My mother was a teenager working in New York City when she helped throw confetti from her office window several days later, as “Lucky Lindy” starred in a tickertape parade down Broadway. Fewer than 40 years later, Mom watched on live TV as an American astronaut walked on the moon. Imagine the progress those two events represent. What technological miracles we’ve witnessed in our lifetimes!
A mere 12 years after Lindbergh’s miraculous flight, Pan American Airlines began transatlantic passenger and airmail service on May 20, 1939, flying from New York City to Marseilles, France. The cabin actually had bunk beds built in, much like sleeper cars on trains today, so passengers could sleep part of the way across the ocean.
– Chip Wood
According to the American Medical Association, “Obesity kills more Americans every year than AIDS, all cancers and all accidents combined.” So why are some doctors refusing to accept otherwise healthy new patients solely because they are overweight?
The Sun Sentinel conducted a poll in South Florida and found 15 obstetrics-gynecology practices out of 105 “said they have set weight cutoffs for new patients starting at 200 pounds or based on measures of obesity — and turn down women who are heavier.”
“People don’t realize the risk we’re taking by taking care of these patients,” Dr. Albert Triana told the paper. Triana’s two-physician practice in South Miami declines patients classified as obese. “There’s more risk of something going wrong and more risk of getting sued. Everything is more complicated with an obese patient in GYN surgeries and in (pregnancies).”
But other doctors disagree. Dr. Bruce Zafran told the Sun Sentinel, “No doctor should be unable to treat patients just because they are heavy.”
“This completely goes against the principles of being a doctor,” James Zervios, a spokesman for the Obesity Action Coalition, told the paper. “Healthcare professionals are there to help individuals improve their quality of health, not stigmatize them according to their weight.”
Representative Ron Paul asks, “How much freedom do we have if we can’t even drink unpasteurized milk?” in a statement on his website announcing his introduction of HR 1830 into the House.
The bill would allow the shipment and distribution of unpasteurized milk and milk products for human consumption across state lines, a practice currently forbidden by the Food and Drug Administration.
“The FDA claims its regulatory powers over food safety give it the authority to ban the interstate sales of raw milk, but this is an unconstitutional misapplication of the commerce clause for legislative ends,” Paul said.
“Mr. Speaker, many Americans who the government wishes to deny the ability to purchase unpasteurized milk have done their own research and come to the conclusion that unpasteurized milk is healthier than pasteurized milk.” Paul said in his statement introducing HR 1830.
“These Americans have the right to consume these products without having the Federal government second-guess their judgment about what products best promote health. If there are legitimate concerns about the safety of unpasteurized milk, those concerns should be addressed at the state and local level.”
The Administration of President Barack Obama has used the Espionage Act to bring criminal charges in five alleged instances of national-security leaks. That is more than all previous Administrations combined.
In an article on NewYorker.com, reporter Jane Meyer discusses the case of Thomas Drake, a former senior executive for the National Security Agency. Drake is being charged under the Espionage Act for talking to a reporter at The Baltimore Sun about “fraud, waste and abuse and the fact that there were legal alternatives to the (George W.) Bush Administration’s ‘dark side.’”
“When President Barack Obama took office in 2009, he championed the cause of government transparency and spoke admiringly of whistle-blowers, whom he described as ‘often the best source of information about waste, fraud and abuse in government,’” the article read. “Gabriel Schoenfeld, a conservative political scientist at the Hudson Institute… says, ‘Ironically, Obama has presided over the most Draconian crackdown on leaks in our history — even more so than Nixon.’”
In the article, Drake said he had hoped Obama would be different, “But power is incredibly destructive. It’s a weird, pathological thing. I also think the intelligence community co-opted Obama, because he’s rather naive about national security. He’s accepted the fear and secrecy. We’re in a scary space in this country.”
President Barack Obama has been signing one-year Obamacare waivers, temporarily exempting businesses that cannot afford the law’s first-year requirements. Apparently, the gourmet restaurants, trendy nightclubs and expensive hotels that populate former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s Northern California district are among those American businesses that cannot afford Obamacare.
According to an article on DailyCaller.com, “Pelosi’s district secured almost 20 percent of the latest issuance of waivers nationwide, and the companies that won them didn’t have much in common with companies throughout the rest of the country that have received Obamacare waivers.”
Thirty-eight of the 204 waivers Obama approved in April are for such “struggling” businesses as “Café des Amis, which describes its eating experience as ‘a timeless Parisian style brasserie’ which is ‘located on one of San Francisco’s premier shopping and strolling boulevards, Union Street,’ according to the restaurant’s Web site,” the article said.
“The reason the Obama Administration says it has given out waivers is to exempt certain companies or policyholders from ‘annual limit requirements.’ The applications for the waivers are ‘reviewed on a case-by-case basis by department officials who look at a series of factors, including whether or not a premium increase is large or if a significant number of enrollees would lose access to their current plan because the coverage would not be offered in the absence of a waiver,’” the article read.
“The waivers don’t allow a company to permanently refrain from implementing Obamacare’s stipulations, but companies can reapply for waivers annually through 2014.”
Nuts have gotten a bad reputation in the past because of their high-calorie, high-fat content. But a growing body of research has suggested that the compounds present in nuts are actually quite healthy and can help keep excess body fat at bay.
In a study that was conducted at the University of California, Los Angeles, a team of researchers found that dieting obese participants who snacked on 240 calories worth of pistachios each day were more likely to reach their weight loss goal than their counterparts who were allowed pretzels as snacks, totaling about 220 calories per serving.
"Snackers often think pretzels are a better choice for weight management compared to a nut like pistachios just because they are lower in fat. This study debunks that myth," said co-author David Heber, M.D., Ph.D.
During the 12-week study, the participants who snacked on nuts consumed about 30 percent of their total calories in fat, whereas the pretzel group's fat intake accounted for just 20 percent of their daily calories.
Of all the revealing things President Barack Obama has said throughout his career — in print, audio, video, and live — perhaps the most revealing of all was something he wrote in Dreams from My Father:
“Eventually a consulting house to multinational corporations agreed to hire me as a research assistant. Like a spy behind enemy lines [my emphasis], I arrived every day at my mid-Manhattan office and sat at my computer terminal, checking the Reuters machine that blinked bright emerald messages from across the globe.”
Why would Obama, who was by then a grown man (not a philosophically confused college kid), feel like a spy behind enemy lines when he was working in the corporate world? There are differing opinions as to what he meant by these words, but to me the only explanation that makes any sense is the one that is… well, self-explanatory.
Though he has gone to a great deal of trouble and expense to destroy the paper trail leading to his radical past, what we do know about this mysterious son of a Kenyan Luo tribesman is that the essence of his being is a belief in redistributing wealth and, in the process, destroying both capitalism and the Western way of life.
Thus, when it was reported that Obama himself gave the order for a team of Navy Seals to kill Osama bin Laden, it raised the question: If Barack Obama is still the same left-wing radical he was when he was close pals with Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, “Marxist professors” in college, et al, why would he order a hit on bin Laden?
The question proved to be rhetorical for many, as polls showed that anywhere from 2 percent (Rasmussen) to 11 percent (New York Times/CBS News) of Americans changed their opinion of Obama and gave him a favorable rating after the purported Osama bin Laden assassination in Pakistan. (Amazingly, some people even decided they liked his handling of the economy immediately following the bin Laden story! Don’t ask.)
Assuming, for the sake of argument, that Osama bin Laden actually was killed as per the government’s description of the event (no hard evidence of what took place has been made available to the public), those who see it as a sign that Obama is a genuinely patriotic American are confused. Even if the facts the government has disseminated about bin Laden’s death are accurate, the event is totally unrelated to Obama’s obsession with “fundamentally transforming America.”
- First, never forget that the No. 1 mantra of the Left is that the end always justifies the means. As Left-wing radicals are fond of saying, in revolutions, innocent people get killed. In other words, the deaths of innocent bystanders is just one of those things — an unfortunate sacrifice for the greater good. That said, if the Left isn’t bothered by the deaths of innocent people, why would Obama care about Osama bin Laden getting a bullet through the eye?
- Second, can you name me a Left-wing leader, at any time in history, who was averse to killing either friend or foe? The Left has a history of employing violence. Nothing new there.
- Third, Obama has repeatedly demonstrated that he doesn’t give a second thought to turning on anyone who gets in the way of his main objective. Why would he care about Osama bin Laden when he didn’t care about his own “spiritual mentor,” Reverend Wright? Or Hosni Mubarak, one of America’s staunchest allies in the Middle East?
Those who now give Obama a favorable rating for supposedly ordering the killing of Osama bin Laden still don’t understand that Obama is the Master of Distraction. The whole event was simply a distraction from his ongoing destruction of the American economy.
When he recently visited the southern border (for the first time in his presidency!), it, too, was nothing more than a distraction ploy. Ditto his campaign speeches when he danced on the graves of the shooting victims in Tucson and those who died at Ground Zero.
Perhaps Osama bin Laden really was killed on May 2. So what? America’s real problem — Barack Obama — is alive and well and continuing right on with his Marx-Alinsky-Piven plan to complete the fundamental transformation of America into a redistributionist hell. Of course, he and the Queen of Anti-obesity will continue to eat caviar and lobster, but… hey… the leader of a revolution has to be comfortable and well fed. After all, under Marxism, some animals are more equal than others.
Obama is a highly disciplined individual, so rest assured that he has not lost his focus on the dreams he got from his communist father. His obsession with destroying entrepreneurship, capitalism, the economy, the dollar, free speech and, above all, the Constitution is stronger now than when he first gained entrance to the White House, courtesy of the mainstream media’s running interference for him.
C’mon, now… do you really believe Obama has banned drilling in most oil-rich areas because he wants to make America great again?
Do you believe he refuses to enforce existing laws on illegal aliens and border security because he wants to make America great again?
Do you believe he enriched the unions at the expense of the bondholders and propped up General Motors with your money because he wants to make America great again?
Do you believe he has appointed scores of radicals to important government posts because he wants to make America great again?
Do you believe he’s added $5 trillion to the national debt since taking office because he wants to make America great again?
The list is endless, and it continues to grow on a daily basis.
The Master of Distraction knows how important it is that he continue to distract the pudding heads who are anxious to give him a boost in the polls every time he makes a smart-aleck crack about tea baggers or moats or alligators. The truth is, he doesn’t give a damn about Osama bin Laden — or anyone else who isn’t integral to his revolutionary goals.
If it takes a bullet in someone’s eye to distract the American public, so be it. That said, I’d like to propose a national moratorium on the gushy applause for Chairman Obama for his “gutsy call.” Please, enough already with the naiveté.
Herman Cain is a fascinating subject. A self-made millionaire, Cain is a deeply conservative man who recently announced his intention to seek the 2012 Republican Presidential nomination. Cain is a graduate of “historically black” Morehouse College in Atlanta — the alma mater of famous African-Americans including auteur Spike Lee, actor Samuel L. Jackson, banker Walter Massey and a certain clergyman from Atlanta who made quite a name for himself back in the 1960s civil rights movement — and woe be unto the pundit who denigrates the name of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
To put a fine point on it, Cain is black. Granted, he’s a long shot to snare a starring role in the next Lee movie about racist pizza (or whatever), but he’s an even longer shot to snare a role in the next Merchant/Ivory film about 18th century Europeans being… boring. It’s hard to imagine someone questioning the “blackness” of a man who rubbed shoulders with such notables at such an institution of higher learning; especially if the questioner is a liberal hack who’s only slightly less white than the Queen of England.
Fortunately for Bill Maher, Democrat Party mouthpieces are evidently exempt from their own standards. On his HBO bobble-head program, the nauseatingly unfunny Maher did NOT call Cain an “Uncle Tom.” However, he did employ Cain as a token to take another gratuitous swipe at the conservatives whom Maher despises more than — well — anything:
“Herman Cain, I never heard of this guy, but apparently he ran Godfather’s Pizza, and Republicans say they love him so they’re not racist — right.”
Actually, the presence of a black man (Cain is not the only African-American whose name has come up. Florida Representative Allen West isn’t exactly Swedish) in the Republican Party Presidential race has no more bearing on the racial politics of the Republican Party in general than President Barack Obama’s mixed-race heritage does on the racial politics of the Democrat Party. In fact, I would posit that a white guy — such as Maher — who would draw such a vertex is himself a racist. Maher, likely out of desperation to denigrate anyone who would challenge his beloved Obama, has attempted to reduce Cain from successful businessman to lawn jockey.
Obama’s political career has largely rested upon some of the most disingenuous race-baiting politics in recent memory. From the 2008 corporate media claiming an Obama loss equated institutional racism, to endlessly Democrat-accepted — albeit factually unsupported — claims of Tea Party racism, to the presence of unrepentant bigots like the repulsive Eric Holder in the Attorney General’s office, the Democrats have made race the centerpiece of the response to virtually every criticism of their Presidential hegemony.
Earlier this year, Democrat Party affiliated hate group Common Cause held a rally at which they unabashedly called for the lynching of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Following that outrage — which went largely unreported by the corporate media — Common Cause issued a half-hearted apology. The “apology” was accepted without question by everyone whom the Democrats consider important; a list which did NOT include the target of the racist invective — Justice Thomas himself. The lily-white Democrats who wished for Thomas to meet his end dangling from a rope made their own bigotry clear in their own words. I have a hard time believing that they’d have demanded a lynching or for Thomas to be sent “to the fields” if he looked like — say — Jay Carney.
Maher noted Cain’s Presidential campaign in an effort to repeat the tired old Democrat smear that Republicans are racist. Assuming that Maher is telling the truth about not recognizing Cain — which reveals a serious lack of professionalism on the part of Maher’s writing staff — then he only noted Cain’s political affiliation because of Cain’s race. THAT, my friends, is racist.
Herman Cain is not “my guy” in the 2012 field, although he’d be a damned sight better at dispensing the duties of the Presidency than the manufactured buffoon who’s squatting there now. But in true liberal fashion, Maher treated Cain like a politicized “Stepin’ Fetch it” in order to prove a Democrat fantasy — Republicans are racist — which doesn’t exist in fact.
I’ll bet you know what your cholesterol level is, but chances are that you never heard of homocysteine.
Well, the cholesterol theory has never been proven but everybody believes that it has. So the pharmaceuticals make billions on this myth.
Many cardiologists build their practice on testing and prescribing cholesterol (statin) drugs. It is not by accident, because many millions of dollars have been spent to promote the cholesterol theory.
It’s a medical craze and it’s a money maker. The point is that most people who get heart disease have normal cholesterol levels in their blood. In fact, scientists have proven that pure cholesterol does not cause arteriosclerosis and that elevation of blood cholesterol is a symptom, not a cause, of heart disease.
How could scientists and medical experts be wrong about the heart disease-cholesterol myth so long? The answer is MONEY!
Homocysteine is a renegade amino acid present in our bodies that has been identified as THE cause of heart disease as well as blood clots, stroke and gangrene. What’s more, keeping homocysteine levels in the safe range does not require expensive medication or any drugs at all, only adequate amounts of certain vitamins i.e., B6, B12 and folic acid. This has all been proven!
Since the therapy for high homocysteine requires no drugs, we can begin to see why nobody knows about it. No Money!
Homocysteine is intimately involved in the aging process, Alzheimer’s, arthritis and cancer. Also, lowering homocysteine causes weight loss, lower blood pressure and, of course, reduced heart disease symptoms and improved general health. How simple is health, without huge amounts of money!
I recommend that every one of you read The Heart Revolution by Dr. Kilmer S. McCully, and then read it again!
And, check your homocysteine level now! Start vitamins B6, B12 and folic acid today.
Further, for those ages 60 and over, your B12 intake should be by injection because, as we age, we have no intrinsic factor. This makes B12 in pill, tablets, etc., useless as our bodies are unable to absorb it. B12 liquid and 100 cc needles are available by prescription. It is very easy to do yourself.
It is believed that 25 percent of those over age 60, especially vegetarians, are very low in vitamin B12. The older we get the more likely we are to have a vitamin B12 deficiency because we lose the ability to absorb it.
Further, the older we get the more our digestive system breaks down, especially with the standard American diet. The lining of the stomach gradually loses its ability to produce hydrochloric acid which releases vitamin B12 from our food.
The use of antacids or ulcer drugs will also lower stomach acid secretion and decrease the ability to absorb vitamin B12. In fact, adequate hydrochloric acid in the stomach is critical to life and health. Americans’ hydrochloric acid has been under attack by pharmaceuticals for decades. There are thousands of prescription and non-prescription drugs that Americans consume with wild abandon. The final insult is the “Purple Pill,” which actually shuts down the proton (acid) pump.
I wonder how much stomach cancer has been caused by these so-called acid stomach relievers?
Representative Ron Paul (R-Texas) has officially thrown his hat into the GOP Presidential ring.
On ABC's "Good Morning America" on May 13, Paul revealed that he will vie for the White House for a third time. In 1988, he ran as a Libertarian and, in 2008, he fell short in the Republican primaries.
"The time has come around to the point where the people are agreeing with much of what I've been saying for 30 years, so I think the time is right," Paul told the media outlet.
According to FOX News, Paul raised more than $1 million through an online fundraiser on May 5, the same day as the first GOP debate featuring Paul and four other Presidential hopefuls.
The Congressman's son, Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.), recently made headlines after he equated President Barack Obama's healthcare law to slavery.
The Tea Party favorite — who, like his father, is a physician — said that the "right" to healthcare means that Americans can show up at his front door and "conscript" him to provide medical treatment.
Paul added that the "implied use of force" in Obamacare "enslaves" doctors, nurses, assistants and all other employees at medical facilities.
San Francisco's board of supervisors has voted to restrict the delivery of Yellow Pages directories to residences and businesses who request the publication.
On May 10, the panel voted 10-1 to ban unrequested delivery of the bulky directories throughout the City by the Bay. If the measure is approved by another vote, San Francisco would become the first city in America to restrict distribution of Yellow Pages.
According to The Associated Press, advocates for the ban claim that the Internet makes the directories unnecessary. City officials stated that the directories generate 7 million pounds of paper waste, which clogs recycling equipment.
The Local Search Association (LSA), a trade association, has urged the board of directors to reconsider their vote. The group said that a ban on the delivery of unrequested Yellow Pages will hurt the economy by putting hundreds of city residents out of work and restricting small business' ability to reach clients.
"It is also unfortunate that they failed to honor the 1st Amendment rights of publishers, advertisers and residents of the city," said LSA president Neg Norton.
Last November, Seattle's city council approved an ordinance to allow residents to refuse delivery of Yellow Pages, The Seattle Times reported. On May 9, a Federal judge rejected an injunction request made by publishers of the directory, who claimed that the opt-out feature violated their 1st Amendment rights.
Business owners and GOP lawmakers in Connecticut are concerned that a proposed bill would violate an employer's freedom-of-speech rights.
The "captive audience" law has passed the state's House of Representatives and will move on to the Senate. If approved and signed by the governor, Connecticut employers would not be allowed to force workers to sit through meetings involving talk of religion and politics, including union organizing, the Republican American reported.
Following a lengthy debate, House lawmakers approved the bill after 1 a.m. on May 12. The chamber passed the measure by a vote of 78-65, the news source reported.
Union groups support the proposal because it prevents bosses from holding sessions in which they attempt to intimidate their workers against joining the union. However, critics of the bill have argued that it is unnecessary legislation because Federal law already prohibits employers from forcing their personal views on staff members, according to NBC Connecticut.
"Even if you believe it's needed, could it be any more vaguely written and subject to misinterpretation?" asked House Minority Leader Lawrence Cafero (R-Norwalk), quoted by the media outlet.
Businessman Donald Trump announced Monday that he will not seek the Republican presidential nomination in 2012, saying, “Ultimately… business is my greatest passion and I am not ready to leave the private sector.”
A blog on WashingtonPost.com said, “Trump’s decision brings to an end a political roller coaster ride on which the flamboyant celebrity pushed the debate over whether President Obama was born in the United States into the public eye, rose as high as second place in polling on the 2012 race and was on the receiving end of a fusillade of jokes from the president during last month’s White House Correspondents Dinner.”
Trump now joins former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee in the list of Republican non-candidates.
The real estate mogul once took credit for forcing Obama to release his long form birth certificate, saying, “I’m very proud of myself because I’ve accomplished something that nobody else has been able to accomplish,” despite mounting evidence that the most recent birth certificate is also a fraud.
Regardless of Trump’s grandstanding, voters were never likely to be swayed: “Polling suggested that vast swaths of the electorate did not think Trump had the right experience to be president or shared their values.”
On Friday, Gallup released the results of a new poll showing that a majority of Americans are against raising the debt ceiling.
The poll results showed that 47 percent of all Americans would vote against raising the debt ceiling. Of those responding negatively, 70 percent were Republicans, 46 percent were Independent and 26 percent were Democrats.
“The public’s perceptions are clearly negative, suggesting the debt ceiling vote is a political hurdle lawmakers will need to overcome,” Gallup said in its report. “Americans are more likely to oppose than favor raising the debt ceiling, regardless of how closely they are following the news about the issue. Among the 23 percent who are following the debt ceiling discussion very closely, 62 percent are opposed and 25 percent are in favor of raising the current ceiling.”
Gallup also noted that, despite public opposition, “Congress is generally expected to pass debt ceiling legislation.”
The Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Indiana citizens have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes.
The 3-2 decision overturns established law “dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215,” according to nwi.com. Justice Steven David said, “We believe… a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence.” The court opinion said, according to the article, “If a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer’s entry.”
Justice Robert Rucker dissented, saying, “In my view the majority sweeps with far too broad a brush by essentially telling Indiana citizens that government agents may now enter their homes illegally—that is, without the necessity of a warrant, consent or exigent circumstances.”
Justice Brent Dickson said, “The wholesale abrogation of the historic right of a person to reasonably resist unlawful police entry into his dwelling is unwarranted and unnecessarily broad.”
The case in question involved a police response to a domestic dispute, in which a couple’s fight had spilled outside. “When the couple went back inside their apartment, the husband told police they were not needed and blocked the doorway so they could not enter. When an officer entered anyway, the husband shoved the officer against a wall. A second officer then used a stun gun on the husband and arrested him.”
On Monday, United States Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told Congress that he will begin suspending investments in government retirement funds in order to free up borrowing capacity.
CNBC.com reported, “Geithner said he would suspend investments in two government retirement funds, which will give the U.S. Treasury $147 billion in additional borrowing capacity.”
Geithner also said, “I again urge Congress to act to increase the statutory debt limit as soon as possible.” The Treasury has said that it will continue to suspend such investments as part of a plan to keep the government solvent, but that such measures would only work until Aug. 2.
The article said, “Previous administrations have also tapped the retirement funds at times to avoid breaching the debt limit. Over the past two decades, Treasury has suspended investments five times, with the most recent suspension in 2006.”
Geithner claimed, “Federal retirees and employees will be unaffected by these actions,” but that he “will be unable to invest fully” in the civil service retirement and disability fund and the government securities investment fund.