“The Queen is the official owner of all swans in open water in Britain.”

What planet am I living on? Her Majesty, the Queen’s planet, apparently.  Read the last 2 lines of this (telegraph.co.uk).

The Queen is the official owner of all swans in open water in Britain.

A Buckingham Palace spokesman was unavailable for comment.

LMAO@Her Majesty and this idiotic newspaper!!!

On the 10th anniversary of the fraud known as 9/11, please reflect on the points made in my “never forget” series

Never forget: Thermate residue was found under WTC 1, 2, and 7

Never forget: No plane hit this building (Building 7)

Never forget: Rumsfeld said “shot down the plane over Pennsylvania”

Never forget: Bush said he saw the first plane crash on TV

Never Forget: FEMA arrived the night before

Banned commercial about debt

LulzSec AZ release shows US Military grenade launchers ended up in the hands of “criminal elements” near Mexico-US border

Private documents recently exposed by hacking group LulzSec have illustrated that selling weapons to foreign entities, especially drug gangs, will inevitably come back to bite us in the ass later.  But of course we have to constantly be meddling in the affairs of Central/South America because our own government wants to keep shipping in massive quantities of drugs.   This is at the root of the problem.  There is too much money being made.  (Read Dark Alliance by Gary Webb, watch “The Mena Connection,” for starters)

From an ATF internal memo to AZ law enforcement:

“Numerous recoveries by Mexican authorities of M203 style 40 mm Grenade Launchers as well as a variety of 40mm high explosive (HE) ordnance, from criminal elements on or near the International Border with the United States.”

So basically, AZ Police better watch out because the Federal Government is selling guns, including .50 cal and grenade launchers to narco gangs south of the border (See here and here)

This is the war we should be fighting- guarding the border against grenade and machine gun attacks by drug gangs which have already claimed the lives of police and border patrol agents.

Potential Health Hazards of Food Irradiation

Please read this entire thing.  Our governments are out of their collective minds.

From ccnr.org

---

Verbatim Excerpts from Expert Testimony
U.S. CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS INTO FOOD IRRADIATION

House Committee on Energy and Commerce
Subcommittee on Health and the Environment

---

~ JUNE 19 1987 ~

Excerpted from the testimony of

1. S. G. Srikantia, B.Sc.,.B.B.S., D.Sc.
   Professor of Food and Nutrition,
   University of Mysore, India;

   Former Director,
   National Institute of Nutrition,
   Hyderabad, India.

2. Donald R Louria, Ph.D.,
   Chairman, Department of
   Preventive Medicine and Community Health,
   University of Medicine and Dentistry, New Jersey
3. George L Tritsch, Ph D
   Cancer Research Scientist,
   Roswell Park Memorial Institute,
   New York State Department of Health
4. Richard Piccioni, Ph D ,
   Senior Staff Scientist,
   Accord Research and Educational Associates
   New York, NY.

Excerpt #1. from the testimony of

S. G. Srikantia, B.Sc.,.B.B.S., D.Sc.

Professor of Foods and Nutrition,
University of Mysore, India; Former Director,
National Institute of Nutrition,
Hyderabad, India.

In response to a request from the Ministry of Health, Government of India, to carry out appropriate studies to determine if irradiated wheat was safe for consumption, the Institute  [ National Institute of Nutrition ]  initiated studies in the year 1973, using a variety of experimental animals — mice, rats and monkeys — as also some undernourished children. They were fed diets which contained freshly irradiated wheat , the wheat being incorporated into the diet within twenty-one days of being subjected to irradiation.

During the course of these studies the Institute made several new and important observations of practical importance and published them in refereed international journals.

The Institute’s Findings

1. Rats and mice fed diets containing freshly irradiated wheat showed increased levels of polyploid cells [ cells with chromosome abnormalities ] in their bone marrow. This was repeatedly observed in several separate experiments.
2. Normal monkeys and undernourished children fed diets containing freshly irradiated wheat showed elevated levels of polyploid [ abnormal ] cells in circulating lymphocytes  [white blood cells] . Several months after the irradiated wheat was withdrawn, levels of polyploidy returned to normal.
3. Mice fed freshly irradiated wheat-based diets showed evidence of dominant lethal mutation as indicated by increased numbers of intrauterine  [ prenatal ]  deaths.
4. When wheat was stored for twelve weeks after irradiation, and then included in the diet, there was neither an increase in the number of polyploid cells nor was there evidence of dominant lethal mutation.

The meaning of increased numbers of polyploid cells is not clear , though it is often seen in association with rapidly regenerating tissues and with malignancy  [ cancer ] . Whether it signifies either mutational or precancerous changes is not certain. But the meaning of “dominant lethal mutation” is obvious — it indicated undesirable changes in reproductive performance.

The explanation for the increased polyploidy and the dominant lethal mutation following the ingestion of freshly irradiated wheat, is not clear. It is likely to be an effect of a mutagen formed in wheat during the process of irradiation. The fact that these effects were not seen when stored irradiated wheat was fed, suggests that the mutagen is a relatively unstable substance

Based on these findings the National Institute of Nutrition recommended that unconditional clearance of irradiated wheat was not warranted and that when subjected to irradiation, wheat should be stored for a period of at least twelve weeks prior to being released for consumption….

Questionable Methods

Recently the Food and Drug Administration, U.S.A.  [ stated that ]  “The Agency agrees with the conclusions of the Committee of Indian Scientists that the studies with irradiated food do not demonstrate that adverse effects would be caused by ingestion of irradiated foods.” (Federal Register 51, April 18, 1986, p 13 385)

The Committee of Indian Scientists referred to here, is a two-man committee which consisted of Dr. P.C. Kesavan and Dr. P.V. Sukhatme, whose report, according to the federal register’s citation, was submitted to the Joint FA0/WHO/IAEA Expert Committee on the Wholesomeness of Irradiated Food, held at Geneva in 1976.

This statement  [ by the U.S. FDA ]  leaves the reader with the impression that the  [ Kesavan-Sukhatme ]  report was discussed by the Joint Expert Group and that the findings in the report were endorsed by it. This would be at variance with the facts because the report was NOT submitted to the Joint Expert Group and therefore was never discussed . I can vouch for this since I was a member of that Expert Group. At that meeting, the   [ earlier ]  findings of the National Institute of Nutrition were accepted, as is reflected in the published reports of the Proceedings….

The FDA has now accepted that it was indeed incorrect to have cited that the Kesavan-Sukhatme report had been submitted to the Expert Group in 1976. It is unfortunate that many of the original readers of the Federal Register may not get to know the truth….

The  [ Kesavan-Sukhatme ]  report was a confidential document. After receiving the report, the government of India sent it to the Director, National Institute of Nutrition, for his views and comments The Institute’s Director sent his comments to the government, which was also a confidential document. As of today, to the best of my knowledge neither of these documents has been made public. It was therefore surprising to learn that the FDA has a copy of the confidential Kesavan-Sukhatme report, and that it has accepted its findings without being aware that the conclusions of that report had been questioned. In his comments the Director, National Institute of Nutrition, has not only refuted some of the statements made in the report, but also provided additional evidence to back up the Institute’s conclusions….

The FDA has committed a serious error of judgment. Had it seen the Institute’s rejoinder to the Kesavan-Sukhatme report, surely, it would have been in a better position to evaluate that report….

It is indeed very strange that aspersions should have been cast on the scientific honesty and integrity of the Institute’s workers a full ten years after the work was published. It is even stranger that the two scientists who allegedly made these statements have denied having made them when they were approached by me. The person who acted as Chairman at the panel discussions has, so far, not responded to my letter. Clearly, there is more here than meets the eye. It is very unfortunate that attempts are being made to discredit the Institute’s work by resorting to questionable methods.

The Institute’s Position

I wish to reiterate that the Institute has NOT withdrawn anything which it said earlier on this subject and stands fully behind all that it has published. Indeed, its stand has received support from the publications of both Renner and Anderson and coworkers. The Institute also does not agree with the Kesavan-Sukhatme report. It stands behind its statement that eating irradiated wheat-based diets is associated with undesirable consequences and reiterates its recommendation that should wheat be irradiated for human consumptions it must be stored for at least 12 weeks before being released for use.

Excerpt #2.

Donald R Louria, Ph.D.,

Chairman, Department of
Preventive Medicine and Community Health,
University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey

I am today urging that adoption of food irradiation be halted until two major issues are resolved.

1. The issue of safety
   It would appear that the FDA gave its approval on the basis of five or six studies on rats and dogs. These were selected as methodologically sound from a pool of over two thousand studies , over four hundred of which appeared potentially good enough for preliminary review. Clearly, there are many potential biases in selecting such a small number of studies on which to base major decisions.Two of the studies are in English, three in French, and one in German. The two in English were reviewed by five epidemiologists and biostatisticians. Their judgment was that both studies posed substantial problems in interpretation. In one of the two studies, published in 1964, the authors note “in many cases statistical comparisons were not possible. However, examination of the data intuitively suggests that the differences have no real significance.”

   In actuality, there were differences between controls and those rats given irradiated wheat, but the small number of animals may not have permitted statistically significant differences to be found. There were unexplained stillbirths in the litters of rats given wheat irradiated with twenty thousand rads; recalculation of that stillbirth rate shows a significant increase. This study is hardly an endorsement for the safety of irradiating food. The other study, intensively reviewed, has similar problems with statistical significance, unexplained deaths, and abnormalities in animals given irradiated foods that are treated dississively and virtually ignored.

   So the two studies in English, instead of documenting safety, raise questions about the safety of food irradiation. Additionally, one of the studies suggests that older animals may be more susceptible to adverse effects when eating irradiated foods.

   What about the French and German studies? In two of the three French studies, the dose of radiation to food was less than fifty thousand rads; this small dosage makes the conclusions difficult to apply to the human situation. No specific adverse effects were noted. The German study showed no adverse effects directly, but showed other adverse effects that will be discussed subsequently.

   Taken together, these studies could not possibly establish the safety of food irradiation. Indeed, two of the studies suggest the technology is not safe.

2. The effects on the nutritional value of food
   In the 1964 report the authors noted that both controls and those fed irradiated wheat were given supplementary vitamins; in part, “this was done to avoid the reproductive difficulties that were attributed to destruction of vitamin E induced by radiation”. In the German experiment, in the first year of analysis those animals given irradiated foods weighed significantly less than controls and showed reproductive defects; both these abnormalities were corrected by administration of vitamins, particularly vitamin E. There are now many other data indicating that irradiation of foods can reduce the nutrient value of those foods. Additionally, further processing of the food, for example by cooking, may result in accelerated nutrient depletion compared to unirradiated foods.

   The supporters of food irradiation treat the potential damage to the nutrient value of food as if it were unimportant or nonexistent That is a major mistake. If the nutrient value of food is reduced, then the argument for food irradiation prolonging shelf life is undercut. Surely, it would not make sense to prolong shelf life if the foods are nutritionally defective.

To summarise, I do not believe that irradiated foods have been shown to be safe for general consumption. Equally important, the effects of irradiation on the nutrient contents of food are not established. I believe the prudent action to take is to prohibit the irradiation of food until the basic issues are sorted out. To do less would be irresponsible.

Excerpt #3.

George L Tritsch, Ph D

Cancer Research Scientist,
Roswell Park Memorial Institute,
New York State Department of Health

I am speaking as a private citizen, and my opinions are my own, based on thirty-three years of experience since my doctorate at Cornell Medical College, Rockefeller University, and, since 1959, as a cancer research scientist and biochemist at Roswell.

I am opposed to consuming irradiated food because of the abundant and convincing evidence in the refereed scientific literature that the condensation products of the free radicals formed during irradiation produce statistically significant increases in carcinogenesis, mutagenesis and cardiovascular disease in animals and man. I will not address the reported destruction of vitamins and other nutrients by irradiation because suitable supplementation of the diet can prevent the development of such potential deficiencies. However, I cannot protect myself from the carcinogenic and other harmful insults to the body placed into the food supples and I can see no tangible benefit to be traded for the possible increased incidence of malignant disease one to three decades in the future.

Irradiation works by splitting chemical bonds in molecules with high energy beams to form ions and free radicals. When sufficient critical bonds are split in organisms contaminating a food, the organism is killed. Comparable bonds are split in the food. Ions are stable; free radicals contain an unpaired electron and are inherently unstable and therefore reactive. How long free radicals remain in food treated with a given dose of radiation or the reaction products formed in a given food cannot be calculated but must be tested experimentally for each food. Different doses of radiation will produce different amounts and kinds of products.

The kinds of bonds split in a given molecule are governed by statistical considerations. Thus, while most molecules of a given fatty acid, for example, may be split in a certain manner, other molecules of the same fatty acid will be split differently. A free radical can either combine with another free radical to form a stable compound, or it can initiate a  [chemical]  chain reaction by reacting with a stable molecule to form another free radical, et cetera, until the chain is terminated by the reaction of two free radicals to form a stable compound. These reactions continue long after the irradiation procedure.

I am bringing this up to give you a rationale for the vast number of new molecules that can be formed from irradiation of a single molecular species, to say nothing of a complicated mixture as a food. Furthermore the final number and types of new molecules formed will depend on the other molecules present in the sample. Thus, free radicals originating from fats could form new compounds with proteins, nucleic acids  [DNA] , etc.

These considerations lead to the following conclusions:

1. A large number of new molecules is formed. Therefore, irradiation is not a process but a means of adding new molecules to food.
2. Theory cannot predict the nature or number or quantity of the new compounds, which will vary with the kind of food, the season, and the location in which it is harvested.
3. Because of the above, extrapolation of the effects of irradiation at one dose to higher doses will not be valid for all molecules, notwithstanding that in several instances, the formation of volatile hydrocarbons from fats has been shown to be related to the dose of radiation in a linear fashion.

The first study I will discuss deals with the danger of irradiation of foods which contain unsaturated fats. This is particularly timely since the American public is being advised to reduce total fat intake, especially intake of saturated fats, because of the excellent correlation  [with]  cardiovascular disease and some forms of cancer. Unsaturated fat consumption is indeed increasing in the United States. When poly-unsaturated fats are exposed to one to four kilogray (100-400 thousand rads) large concentrations of peroxides are formed and a concomitant oxidation of benzo-pyrenes to mutagenic benzo-pyrene quinones takes place. This response is dose dependent. Unsaturated fats such as cod liver oil and mackerel oil showed much greater benzo-pyrene quinone formation than saturated fats (like coconut oil) or fats containing vitamin E, such as corn oil.

This recent study of 1986 clearly shows that peroxidation of lipids by irradiation produces known carcinogens. Not emphasised in this paper is that peroxidation of lipids also results in their cross-link polymerization in a manner akin to the drying of oil-based paint These polymers cannot be digested by our digestive enzymes and will likely be deposited as insoluble plaques in blood vessels. This would have analogous results as the deposition of insoluble cholesterol plaque is well known to lead to high blood pressure and cardiovascular disease in some individuals. In a consensus statement frequently quoted to document the safety of irradiated food by proponents the following statement is made:

“In this research, several anomalies appeared in the test animals (for example, hemorrhages, ruptured hearts and vitamin deficiencies) but these were related to feeding the test animals food they did not customarily eat, and not to treating the foods with ionizing energy”

Hemorrhages and ruptured hearts bring to mind acute and extremely high elevation of blood pressure. I would question the prudence of instigating a study of feeding animals food they do not customarily eat and then dismissing adverse effects for this reason. I do not believe such a statement could appear in the refereed scientific literature.

I would next mention the effects of irradiation on nitrate in foods. Irradiation converts nitrate to nitrite in a dose dependent manner. Mutagenesis is directly proportional to nitrite concentration. Nitrite is a reactive molecule and reacts with nucleic acids and various amino acids in protein and forms the known family of carcinogens known as nitrosamines. These have been demonstrated to be potent carcinogens in man.

Now let me turn to what I believe to be the most convincing and comprehensive group of studies to demonstrate the harmful effects of irradiated food. In 1975 were reported the results of feeding five malnourished Indian children wheat irradiated with 75,000 rads. This wheat produced weight gain, serum albumin, and hemoglobin levels indistinguishable from what was found with unirradiated wheat. However, four of the five children showed gross chromosomal polyploidy four weeks after initiation of the feeding program. Chromosome number returned to normal twenty six weeks after the feeding was stopped. This is unequivocal evidence of a potent mutagen in irradiated wheat. I would remind you that the high lung cancer incidence in the United States in 1982-83 was 80 per 100,000, which is equivalent to 0.08 percent. In these children, incidence of polyploidy was 80 percent  [1000 times larger] .

Proponents of food irradiation have attempted to dismiss this study since only five individuals were involved, but mercifully no one has repeated this with greater numbers of children, especially since equivalent results were found when irradiated wheat was fed to monkeys and rats. In both these studies polyploidy was seen after several weeks of feeding and returned to normal about two months after feeding irradiated wheat was stopped. In summary, I would be hard put to find a group of better studies to demonstrate the mutagenic properties of irradiated wheat

Excerpt #4.

Richard Piccioni, Ph D ,

Senior Staff Scientist,
Accord Research and Educational Associates
New York, NY.

Over the past twenty months, a team of biologists, chemists, physicians and statisticians in our organisation have carried out an in-depth examination of the technical basis of the Food and Drug Administration’s recent approval of food irradiation processing. We feel that there is no assurance in the scientific literature or the arguments of the FDA that the widespread irradiation of food will not be a significant, if silent, threat to the public health.

In summary we feel the FDA has adopted scientifically indefensible criteria for assessing, and in their view, demonstrating, the safety of irradiated foods.

Treatment of food with ionizing radiation presents issues of food safety qualitatively unlike those posed by any other food processing method or food additive. The large amount of energy contained in ionising radiation provides the potential for exceedingly complex chemical transformation of food components including the production of mutagenic or carcinogenic substances which were not present or were present in far smaller amounts before irradiation. This potential far exceeds that of ordinary heat processing, microwave radiation, etc. At the same time, because the production of these “radiolytic products” takes place within the food itself, it is impossible to design a toxicological test in which animals are exposed to exaggerated doses of these products the chemical identity of which remains largely unknown. Thus toxicologists are limited to biological testing which is thousands of times less sensitive than the testing typically required of other chemical additives or pesticide residues.

In 1979, after years of controversy and false starts, radiation food processing was reevaluated by a specially appointed FDA committee, the BFIFC (Bureau of Foods Irradiated Foods Committee) They acknowledged that feeding whole irradiated foods to test animals, even after long periods of time, was completely inadequate to assess the carcinogenic potential of the radiolytic products present in those foods. As an alternative to direct biological testing they proposed acceptance of a theoretical calculation of the maximum concentration of radiolytic products present in irradiated food — and made the extraordinary leap of faith that parts-per-million residues of unknown substances pose no risk when ingested by millions of people over their entire lives.

Subsequently an FDA task force reiterated the BFIFC recommendations and reported the results of an elaborate Review” of the available literature on the toxicological testing of irradiated foods – testing which they, as well as the BFIFC, agreed was inherently incapable of providing definitive evidence of the safety of irradiated food. The five studies which have been mentioned by others at this hearing provided, according to the Fen itself only the assurance that irradiated food is not wildly mutagenic and/or carcinogenic. The task force therefore justified its conditional approval of irradiation of fruits and vegetables with up to one hundred thousand rads, and spices with up to three million rads, on the same theoretical basis as proposed by the BFIFC.

Proponents of food irradiation commonly claim there are no studies in the scientific literature showing mutagenic or carcinogenic activity in irradiated foods or food components. In fact, as our own literature survey has shown, dozens of such studies exist, observed in a variety of biological systems, published by a variety of authors, in a variety of peer-reviewed scientific journals, over a period of twenty years.

In fact, a substantial number of studies can be found in the open scientific literature indicating the presence of known mutagens, carcinogens, or cytotoxic substances in focd or food components which have been irradiated. Furthermore, the radiation chemistry of foods is far from fully understood, as evidenced by a steady appearance in the literature of studies on new radiolytic products found in various irradiated foods (e.g. Simic and Jovanovic, 1986; and ^khlag et al, 1987) Many of these radiolytic products have not been individually tested for mutagenicity or carcinogenicity.

In short, the available scientific literature provides evidence to make a strong presumption of carcinogenicity in some if not all irradiated food. The question is one of quantifying the risk.

Recently, the National Academy of Sciences (1987) identified twenty-three pesticides which are responsible for the vast majority of the total carcinogenic risk posed by the presence of pesticide residues in the U S food supply. Food irradiation would make essentially no contribution to the elimination of these pesticides since, of the twenty-three, several are herbicides or insecticides applied in the field, and the remainder are fungicides, whose replacement by irradiation is a highly dubious proposition. In fact irradiation of fruits and vegetables may well increase, rather than decrease, the requirement for post-harvest application of fungicide, because irradiated products are more susceptible to infection by colds and fungi.

On the question of the use of ionizing radiation to inactivate salmonella in poultry, it is important to understand two points:

1. Doses required for even partial “pasteurisation” of poultry meat are far greater than the doses which have been deemed “safe” by any of the evidence or arguments provided by the FDA to date. All of the concerns of the presence of trace mutagens or carcinogens in foods irradiated at “low” doses of 100,000 rads are only greater at doses of one million rads, required for even partial salmonella inactivation.
2. Major unresolved microbiological questions arise regarding the safety of gamma processing of salmonella-contaminated poultry. Much of the virulence of the recent cases of salmonellosis has been attributed to the presence of antibiotic resistant strains of the pathogens due in turn to the use of these antibiotics in the poultry industry. The addition of a highly mutagenic processing procedure, namely gamma irradiation, on poultry carcasses still containing low levels of antibiotic, is an appalling scenario for the appearance in the irradiated food of new, antibiotic resistant strains. This issue has received serious but not adequate attention in the scientific literature.

The FDA has also been quick to dismiss concerns that irradiation of Aspergillis flavus spores, or the grains upon which this fungus can grow, can increase the production of the potent carcinogen aflatoxin, citing and dismissing a single study on the subject. In fact, there have been several studies showing serious aflatoxin-enhancing effects at or near the very doses proposed for the irradiation of grain.

In summary, the continuing research effort by our organisation indicates clearly that recent and pending approvals of food irradiation processing by the FDA should be rescinded, and the same degree of caution now being expressed by several states and national agencies around the world be implemented on a federal level.

The Elite’s Plan for Global Extermination Exposed by Dr. Webster Tarpley

This is part 2 of 4….

All (?) Pentagon Papers released

Conspicuously absent are Johnson’s “internal documents,” perhaps those related to the staged Gulf of Tonkin incident.

Archives.gov

Files

(All files in the “Title” column are in PDF format)

32 Signs That The Entire World Is Being Transformed Into A Futuristic Big Brother Prison Grid

(endoftheamericandream.com) Do you want your children and grandchildren to live in a futuristic “big brother” control grid where everything they do is watched, recorded, tracked and tightly controlled?  Well, that is exactly where things are headed.  We witnessed some really bad totalitarian regimes during the 20th century, but what is coming is going to be far more restrictive than any of the despots of the past ever dreamed was possible.  Today, nearly every government on earth is tightening their grip on their citizens.  Paranoia has become standard operating procedure all over the planet and nobody is to be trusted.  Global politicians will give speeches about liberty and freedom even as they undermine them at every turn.  There are very, very few nations on the planet where liberty and freedom are increasing.  Instead, almost everywhere you turn the “control grid” is getting tighter.  Governments don’t want us gathering together and interacting with one another.  Instead, they want us to work our tails off to support the system, they want us enslaved financially and constantly drowning in debt, and they want us addicted to television and other forms of entertainment.  They want us as numb and docile as possible.  Meanwhile, all over the globe they continue to construct a futuristic “big brother” control grid that will ensure that they will always be able to control us.

Sadly, this is not the plot to some post-apocalyptic science fiction movie.

This is really happening.

When you read the list below, each of the 32 signs may not seem to be all that significant individually.  However, when they are all taken together, they paint a truly frightening picture….

#1 The days of the free and open Internet are slowly coming to an end.  Many nations around the world have implemented strict Internet censorship and many other nations are moving in that direction.  With each passing year the level of freedom on the Internet diminishes.

Regulation of the Internet has even become a primary topic of discussion at G-8 meetings.  According to The New York Times, French President Nicolas Sarkozy is leading the charge for a more “civilized Internet”….

Leaders of the Group of 8 industrialized countries are set to issue a provocative call for stronger Internet regulation, a cause championed by the host of the meeting, President Nicolas Sarkozy of France, but fiercely opposed by some Internet companies and free-speech groups.

Why are free speech groups strongly opposing what Sarkozy is trying to do?

It is because western governments want to kill liberty and freedom on the Internet just like China is doing.  The Internet has been a great tool for waking people up and distributing information, and the control freaks that want to run all of our lives do not like that one bit.

#2 Internet censorship in China, the largest nation on earth, is absolutely brutal. The Chinese government blocks any websites that talk about such topics as the Dalai Lama, the 1989 crackdown on Tiananmen Square protesters and Falun Gong.

Even web searches for the English word “freedom” are blocked.

#3 Starting next year, all new cellphones will be required to contain a chip that will allow the president to broadcast “emergency alerts” to the cellphones whenever the president wants.  Cellphone users will not be allowed to opt out of the presidential messages.

The following is how a CBS news report describes the new system….

A new national alert system is set to begin in New York City that will alert the public to emergencies via cell phones.

It’s called the Personal Localized Alert Network or PLAN. Presidential and local emergency messages as well as Amber Alerts would appear on cell phones equipped with special chips and software.

#4 The U.K. has more surveillance cameras per citizen than anywhere else in the world. In fact, according to one estimate, there are 4.8 million video cameras constantly watching every move citizens make.

#5 A “certified TSA official” was brought in to oversee student searches at the Santa Fe High School prom last weekend.

Will this kind of thing soon be happening at every high school in America?

#6 The U.S. Department of Agriculture is spending huge amounts of money to install surveillance cameras in the cafeterias of public schools so that government control freaks can closely monitor what our children are eating.

The following is how a recent article posted on Infowars.com describes this new program….

Billed as part of an effort to reduce obesity and improve eating habits, small cameras are programmed to take snapshots of lunch trays before and after each student eats. Each child is uniquely identifiable via a barcode attached to the tray. The amount of calories and nutrients that each child has consumed is then calculated via a database containing 7,500 different varieties of food.

#7 The EU is spending hundreds of millions of euros on propaganda campaigns in an attempt to convince the citizens of Europe that the EU is good for them.

#8 Today, FBI surveillance teams regularly employ warrantless GPS tracking to monitor the movements of peaceful activists – even if they are not suspected of ever committing a crime.  The Obama administration is fighting in court to keep this practice legal.

#9 According to FBI Director Robert Mueller, “homegrown terrorists” represent as big a threat to American national security as al-Qaeda does.

#10 Federal VIPR teams are establishing a series of “internal checkpoints” all across the United States.  The following is how a recent article by Paul Joseph Watson described these VIPR team activities….

The TSA has announced its intention to expand the VIPR program to include roadside inspections of commercial vehicles, setting up a network of internal checkpoints and rolling out security procedures already active in airports, bus terminals and subway stations to roads and highways across the United States.

By the way, who in the world decided that it would be a good idea to call them “VIPR teams”?

What is next?  Are we going to find out that the TSA has hired Cobra Commander and Destro as consultants?

#11 Thousands of “dysfunctional” families in the U.K. are being subjected to intensive 24-hour surveillance to make sure that their children attend school, go to bed on time and eat proper meals.

#12 U.S. Senator Chuck Schumer says that Amtrak should have a “no ride list” similar to the “no fly list” used at U.S. airports.

Before you can get on an airplane today, your name is checked to make sure that it is not on any international watch lists.

So what do you have to do to get on an international watch list?

Nobody really knows.

What is next?

A “no breathe list”?

#13 U.K. authorities are now admitting that every phone call, text message, email and website visit made by private citizens will be stored for one year and will be available for monitoring by government agencies.

#14 The amount of cell phone surveillance that goes on is absolutely staggering.  For example, one German politician named Malte Spitz recently went to court to force Deutsche Telekom to reveal how often his cell phone was being tracked.  What he found out was absolutely amazing.  It turns out that in just one 6 month period, Deutsche Telekom recorded the longitude and latitude coordinates of his cell phone 35,000 times.

#15 DARPA has now developed new video surveillance technology that many are warning will bring about the end of public anonymity.  The following is how the ExtremeTech blog is describing this new technology….

To be in public is to be on camera, but most video footage is discarded, as only so much can be sorted and analyzed — until now. DARPA has created a technology that can index and analyze video in real-time, marking the end of anonymity in public places.

#16 In the U.K., it is now illegal to photograph the police for any reason whatsoever.

#17 Police in the U.K. have purchased software that will enable them to easily follow the “digital footprints” of virtually anyone.  The following is how one recent news report in the U.K. described this new software….

The Metropolitan Police has bought Geotime, a security programme used by the U.S. military which tracks suspects’ movements and communications and displays them on a three-dimensional graphic.

The software aggregates information gathered from social networking sites, GPS devices like the iPhone, mobile phones, financial transactions and IP network logs to build a detailed picture of an individual’s movements.

#18 In Tacoma, Washington a seventh grade student was recently questioned by the Secret Service about a message that he posted on his Facebook page.

Be very careful about what you put up on Facebook or Twitter.  The entire world can see it.

#19 According to the ACLU, state police in Michigan are using “extraction devices” to download data from the cellphones of motorists that they pull over.  This is taking place even if those pulled over are not accused of doing anything wrong.

The following is how an article on CNET News describes the capabilities of these “extraction devices”….

The devices, sold by a company called Cellebrite, can download text messages, photos, video, and even GPS data from most brands of cell phones. The handheld machines have various interfaces to work with different models and can even bypass security passwords and access some information.

#20 Last year, one shocking poll found that 51 percent of Americans agree with this statement: “It is necessary to give up some civil liberties in order to make the country safe from terrorism.”

#21 The MPAA and RIAA have submitted their master plan for enforcing copyright rights to the new Office of Intellectual Property Enforcement and it includes installing spyware on everyone’s computers that would detect and delete any infringing materials.

#22 The U.K.’s new Internet law includes a “three strikes” rule that allows your entire family to be cut off from the Internet if anyone who lives in your house is accused of copyright infringement – without proof or evidence or trial.

#23 Would you like to have your face scanned and your ID recorded every time you attend a public event?  Don’t laugh.  The San Francisco Entertainment Commission is actually proposing a new rule which “would require all venues with an occupancy of over 100 people to record the faces of all patrons and employees and scan their ID’s for storage in a database which they must hand over to law enforcement on request.”

#24 Today, the U.S. government and governments all over the industrialized world have become so obsessed with reducing carbon emissions that now they even tell us what kinds of light bulbs we are allowed to buy.

#25 The Obama administration is developing a universal “Internet ID” program that would watch, track, monitor and potentially control your activity on the Internet. These “trusted identities” are being touted as a way to increase safety and security on the Internet and as a way to eliminate the need for dozens of different usernames and passwords.

#26 As I have written about previously, the “Internet kill switch” is rapidly becoming one of the favorite new tools of tyrannical governments all over the globe….

Once upon a time, the Internet was a bastion of liberty and freedom, but now nation after nation is cracking down on it. In fact, legislation has been introduced once again in Congress that would give the president of the United States an “Internet kill switch” that he would be able to use in the event of war or emergency. Of course there would be a whole lot of wiggle room in determining what actually constitutes a true “emergency”. The members of Congress that are pushing this “Internet kill switch” bill want the U.S. to become more like China in this regard.

#27 A shocking document released by Wikileaks proves that high level U.S. government officials have been pushing for North American integration.  According to the document, some of the goals of this integration would be to turn North America into an economic zone similar to the EU, to have one common currency for the entire continent and to have one common “security perimeter” for the entire continent.

Let us hope that a plan like this never comes to pass.

#28 One of the most liberty-killing pieces of legislation in recent years was the Patriot Act.  Unfortunately, the vast majority of Republicans and the vast majority of Democrats will never vote against the renewal of the Patriot Act because they don’t want to look “soft” on terrorism.

About the only U.S. Senator to stand up against the Patriot Act is Rand Paul.  He is doing all he can to fight a one man battle against the Patriot Act but Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is doing his best to extend the Patriot Act without any debate taking place.

Top Democrats are attempting to claim that even debating the renewal of Patriot Act provisions would “endanger” national security.

Of course most Republicans are not going to stand in the way because they absolutely love the Patriot Act.

If you still believe that the Patriot Act is a good idea, you should watch this video, and you should read this recent article.

#29 If you display the wrong political message on your car, you may find law enforcement officials cracking down on you.

A 73-year-old Virginia resident was recently kicked out of a national park for displaying a sticker promoting “Ron Paul’s Campaign for Liberty” on his car.

The following is an excerpt from a recent Rutherford Institute report about this incident….

The Rutherford Institute has come to the defense of a 73-year-old Virginia resident who was allegedly ordered by a park ranger to remove his car from a national military park in South Carolina because of political messages attached to his vehicle. Jack Faw, whose ancestors fought in the historic battle memorialized at Kings Mountain National Military Park, contacted The Rutherford Institute after being told by a park ranger that the decal promoting a political organization associated with Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), which was displayed on the back window of Faw’s car, was not allowed in the park.

#30 Brutal crowd control techniques are not just for major events anymore. Recently, riot police in Illinois used tear gas, LRAD sound weapons and crowd suppression tactics against a bunch of college students that were just blowing off some steam at a year-end block party at Western Illinois University.

#31 The U.S. government is gathering more information on all of us than ever before.  According to a recent article in the Baltimore Sun, every six hours the volume of information that the NSA gathers is equivalent to the entire Library of Congress.

Nobody is anonymous anymore.  The truth is that the U.S. government, governments across the globe and major international corporations have more information about you than you probably ever dared to imagine.

#32 If you think things are bad now, just wait until you see what global authorities have planned for the future.

Are you ready to live in a “Planned-opolis”?  Are you ready to use a “calorie card” and to have what you eat determined by a “global food council”?

The following video was originally produced by the Forum for the Future, a major NGO funded by big corporations such as Time Warner and Royal Dutch Shell.  In this video, the Forum for the Future presents their chilling version of the future….

If you don’t want to live in a “Planned-opolis” where everything you do is constantly watched, tracked and controlled by a horde of bureaucrats then you better say something now.

The entire globe is moving in the direction of totalitarianism.  Our world is literally becoming a prison grid.  Of course those in power say that we need more regulation and more control “for the good of humanity”, but that has never worked out too well in the past, now has it?

If you don’t like the direction this world is headed then now is the time to stand up and let your voice be heard.  If you wait until they are ripping the last shreds of liberty and freedom away from you it will be too late.