I rest my case, your Honour. Now if you’ll excuse me…
I rest my case, your Honour. Now if you’ll excuse me…
I’m back. It’s been a few years. I’ve been here and there, compiled even more research and have much to put on here for you. Conclusions I have reached that I have to share. I will be going to places I maybe shouldn’t be going to, but I’ll keep pushing it until you tell me to stop.
It’s going to be a little while until I hit my stride, I have lots of comments to approve, spam to clear, templates to reset, links to gather, I need to organise.
I’ll give you more personal thoughts in coming posts.
Thanks for reading.
And as far as the system is concerned? THIS IS WAR.
This contains additional information and quotes added by yours truly to give the article wider context.
From almost the first moment of recorded history, one set of relationships has been at the heart of the human experience and the basis of civilisation itself: a mother and father who depend on each other; the children who rely on them both; a supportive network of grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins.
Without the loyalties and obligations of the committed family, our ancestors would certainly have struggled to survive in a dangerous and frightening world.
How else but with the help of kin could they have coped with the critical moments in life: birth, sickness, old age, the need to educate and train their young? Without such help from the very beginning, it may be asked whether humankind would ever have developed the capacity to build an advanced civilisation.
That is because it probably wouldn’t have. Matriarchal societies move males to the periphery. They are at the bottom of the social ladder and are therefore not motivated to take the risks to advance the society with technology, as is evidenced by Daniel Amneus in his book, The Garbage Generation. A must read.
This week a report from Unicef, the UN’s child welfare agency, warned that working mothers take a massive risk when they put their offspring into low quality childcare.
This is in regards to the state deciding to force women into work once their child is one years old. No doubt to not only pay for the disgusting debt these socialists have put Britain in with the bankers, but also to control the next generation.
“No woman should be authorized to stay at home and raise her children. Society should be totally different. Women should not have that choice, precisely because if there is such a choice, too many women will make that one.” – Interview with Simone de Beauvoir, “Sex, Society, and the Female Dilemma,” Saturday Review, June 14, 1975, p.18
Until very recently, in fact, the importance of the family was taken for granted, not only as the basis of society, but as the foundation of our human identity.
Today? In western societies – and especially in the English-speaking world – we think we know better. Forget the wisdom of the ages. Forget our deep-rooted instincts.
Forget precepts that have governed every society in every era of history.
The importance of the ‘traditional’ family is being challenged as never before.
The idea has taken root that human families can be constructed in any way people want. The message is that biology counts for nothing.
Biological mothers don’t matter to their children. Biological fathers don’t matter either.
All that matters is what adults want – and children must adapt to it, whether they like it or not.
The sheer speed of what is happening is quite astonishing. In less than 50 years, the old values have been stood on their head.
Today, legislators don’t hesitate to plunge into ‘reforms’ that tear up the rights, duties and obligations that have underpinned the family for millennia.
They rush into new ‘ postmodernist’ concepts of family, partnering and parenthood. Indeed, they are even attempting to banish the word ‘marriage’ from the statute books.
Everywhere in the West, the liberal consensus is on the march. In Britain, for example, a Labour Government has discouraged the use of the ‘m’ word in official documents, while in the U.S., the American Law Institute recommends that marriage should be ‘ deprivileged’ and not be given a status above any other relationship.
Yet on any rational analysis, this reckless embrace of a brave new world is simply perverse, since there is no doubt whatever that the traditional family, underpinned by marriage, is the best way of bringing up secure, happy children and maintaining social stability.
Which is precisely why the liberal-fascists/ socialists/ feminists are so keen on destroying it. This is not news, this is historical fact.
“[The nuclear family is] a cornerstone of woman’s oppression: it enforces women’s dependence on men, it enforces heterosexuality and it imposes the prevailing masculine and feminine character structures on the next generation.” – Alison Jaggar, Feminist Politics and Human Nature
“We can’t destroy the inequities between men and women until we destroy marriage.” – Robin Morgan (ed), Sisterhood is Powerful, 1970, p.537
Feminism plays a very important role in destroying the family (softening up society for enslavement). The socialist state can not tolerate competition to its control over the population. It is an ideology of social engineering. The nuclear family represents a unit stronger than the bond between individual and state. It also gives men and women much to lose, which makes all the more difficult to enslave. This is no accident.
You don’t have to be a religious believer or a Victorian moralist to take this view. The evidence speaks for itself (despite the strenuous efforts of the liberal establishment to ignore it).
Fact: one in two unmarried couples splits up before their first child is five years old. The figure for married couples is just one in 12.
Fact: children from broken homes are 75 per cent more likely than their classmates to fail at school, 70 per cent more likely to be involved with drugs and 50 per cent more likely to have alcohol problems.
They are also more likely to run away from home, find themselves in the care system and end up in jail.
At the very least, those bleak statistics should give us pause. The truth is that some of the most intractable problems facing Britain today – from our tragically high rate of teenage pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases to petty crime, gang membership and welfare dependency – have their roots in family breakdown.
Harriet Harman MP, the socialist/ feminist fasicst is recorded as saying:
marriage was ‘irrelevant’ to public policy and described high rates of separation as a ‘positive development’, as it reflected ‘greater choice’ for couples – never mind the children.
Take the shabby way successive governments have treated marriage in this country, even though they know perfectly well that it is one of the great foundations of society.
It was a Tory Chancellor, Kenneth Clarke, who dismissed the married couples’ tax allowance as ‘an anomaly’. And it was former Home Secretary Jack Straw who proclaimed: ‘This Government will not preach about marriage.’
The result? In Britain today it just doesn’t pay to get married. Our tax and benefits system is so arranged that if lower-income couples who are living together get married, they will significantly increase their tax payments and lower their benefits.
Perhaps it’s no wonder that this country has a higher percentage of lone-parent families than any other country in Europe, apart from Sweden.
The system is designed to create family instability. And the costs, both social and financial, are huge.
How to explain this bizarre discouragement of an institution so important to the happiness, stability and financial health of the country?
Politicians are terrified of being thought ‘judgmental’ about the way citizens live. And they obviously take the defeatist view that nothing can be done to improve matters anyway.
Nonsense, they are only in power because they subscribe to the Marxist school of thought, whether that be socialism or its logical extension, communism. Both are collectivist totalitarian regimes that place the State as the all important construct and reduce the individual citizens to the position of slaves to its function creep and ever growing power. Reminds me of how the matriarchal society treats men. No wonder women subscribe to it.
The same aversion to moralising applies increasingly to the laws on marriage and divorce.
Not only are we witnessing ever easier divorce – whatever the children may need or want – and same-sex marriages, but there is also growing pressure to remove the words ‘father’ and ‘mother’ from birth certificates and replace them by ‘Progenitor A’ and ‘Progenitor B’ (as is already happening in Spain).
Whatever the motivation behind such trends, the ‘ traditional’ family structure is being badly eroded.
All this reminds me of the grim ideas floated in ancient Athens 2,500 years ago. In the vision sketched out in Plato’s Republic – a philosophical treatise on the most fundamental principles of the conduct of human society – mating would be random.
Children would be raised by the state. Neither mothers nor fathers could claim their biological offspring as their own. Nor could they raise their children.
And yet the family in its traditional form is crucial to us all – not simply because it underpins social stability or because it connects us to the past and the future, but because it’s also a bulwark of freedom itself.
Why? Because the invisible bonds it creates between its members generate loyalties and affections capable of resisting any tyranny.
Exactly. Why would these agents of the elite do this? Maybe it is because their plan for the global socialist dictatorship depends on it. They must destroy the institutions that make a strong society so it can then be taken over with ease, using lots of small changes over time, changing the structure of society to one which will be more susceptible to the type of tyranny they wish for us all. This is Fabian Socialism and it is happening to Britain NOW.
“To achieve One World Government it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism, their loyalty to family traditions and national identification.” – Brock Chisholm, while director of UN World Health Organization.
“We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent.” — Statement made before the United States Senate on Feb. 7, 1950 by James Paul Warburg
“National Socialism will use its own revolution for establishing of a new world order.” — Adolph Hitler during World War II
“Mankind’s problems can no longer be solved by national government. What is needed is a world government. This can best be achieved by strengthening the United Nations system.” – Human Development Report, published by the UN Development Program, 1994
“The creation of a United Europe must be regarded as an essential step towards the creation of a United World.” – Jean Monnet, founder of the European Economic Community, 1948
“We are moving toward a new world order, the world of communism. We shall never turn off that road.” – Mikhail Gorbachev, 1987
“Our culture, including all that we are taught in schools and universities, is so infused with patriarchal thinking that it must be torn up root and branch if genuine change is to occur. Everything must go – even the allegedly universal disciplines of logic, mathematics, and science, and the intellectual values of objectivity, clarity, and precision on which the former depend.” – A quote from Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge, “Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women’s Studies” (New York, Basic Books, 1994), p. 116
December 12, 2008
According to a study led by David Schmitt, a professor of psychology at Bradley University, Illinois, Britons lead the western world in casual sex. The number of ‘one-night stands’ by both men and women are up and they are “the most promiscuous in the world.” While some praise this behavior as being “sexually free” it does have devastating consequences for human civilization. Consider the recent headline, “Drunken one-night stands over New Year will bring a record number of abortions” among teenagers.
While many “liberated” women say that they can separate sex and emotional attachment like men can and that casual sex is no big deal, testimonials do not bear this out. Besides the physical consequences of sexually-transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancies, the emotional toll is not something that is casual – it may be consciously ignored, but it is deep and long-lasting The elite know that the more sexual partners one has, the less able they are to maintain a long-term monogamous relationship like marriage. This is an insidious way to undermine the natural bonds that form marriages and create children.
And the ubiquitous sexual messages we encounter are no accident. Contained in television, movies, music, general advertisements and even now in virtual worlds, to which the public is retreating from this increasingly upsetting real-life world, these ever-present reminders of the cult of youth, beauty and sex are targeted at the young.
And the youth are absorbing those messages and putting them into practice as the results of this study show:
“Twenty-one percent of girls and 18% of boys said they have posted nude or partially nude pictures of themselves online. Forty-nine percent of teens and young adults have sent sexually suggestive text messages or e-mails of themselves. Fifteen percent of teens who sent sexually suggestive content said they have done so with someone they only know online.”
With more and more children being raised online, and coupled with the intensive mandatory sex education at public schools, they are subjected to more degrading influences and less direct family input than ever before. The deleterious effects of utilizing their unprecedented freedom online, participating in virtual worlds where anything is acceptable with no consequences, these children are literally becoming unable to form and maintain even simple friendships with actual peers they encounter in their real lives.
All of these contribute to the planned decline of civilization and the institution of . The social engineers have cleverly devised a top-down approach to tearing apart the nuclear family due to its threat to their plans for their New World Order. It is imperative to achieving their plans that the youth and young adults are inculcated with the ideas that procreating is selfish, greedy and inconvenient. They are taught from a very young age by teachers cum “change agents” to believe that human life is not as valuable as flora and fauna, that cultural morés and morals are “outdated and outmoded” and therefore should be discarded in favor of new “liberated” thinking of secular humanism, which espouses the belief that there is no concrete “right and wrong” therefore anything is justifiable with enough rationalization.
Marie Stopes, friend of fellow eugenicist Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, created the first birth control clinic in Britain and advocated “’sterilization of those totally unfit for parenthood be made an immediate possibility, indeed made compulsory.’ And in The Control of Parenthood, (1920)… wrote that were she in charge, she would ‘legislate compulsory sterilization of the insane, feebleminded… revolutionaries… half castes.’ She opposed the marriage of her own son merely because his bride-to-be wore glasses. And upon her death a large portion of her fortune was bequeathed to the Eugenics Society.” Marie Stopes International carries out one out of every three abortions in the UK, and promotes “voluntary sterilization.”
Most people instinctively recoil at the prospect of either voluntary or state-imposed sterilization, but sadly there are many who have been so brainwashed that they have aborted their pregnancies because having children is not “eco-friendly” and many others who have been voluntarily sterilized because of outright selfishness (”it would hamper my lifestyle and I wouldn’t be able to do the things I want to do”), others being “repulsed by… the idea of being pregnant and having a child” or just total lack of any maternal instinct.
This is a source of joy to the eugenicists and population control/reduction proponents because their mildly coercive population control via “education” and constant propaganda is working so well in the western world. The rampant promiscuity and resultant high divorce rate, astronomically increased infanticide, children’s lack of ability to form even the most basic relationship – friendship, legions of children being raised less by parents and more by teachers (e.g., the State) all accomplish the population reduction plan quite nicely without having to resort to bloodshed, except of course for the infants that are aborted.
But, as Bertrand Russell stated, “I do not pretend that birth control is the only way in which population can be kept from increasing. There are others, which, one must suppose, opponents of birth control would prefer. War, as I remarked a moment ago, has hitherto been disappointing in this respect, but perhaps bacteriological war may prove more effective. If a Black Death could be spread throughout the world once in every generation survivors could procreate freely without making the world too full… The state of affairs might be somewhat unpleasant, but what of that? Really high-minded people are indifferent to happiness, especially other people’s.”
We who value Freedom must resist the New World Order by educating ourselves and others, and refusing to participate in eugenics and voluntary population control.
Oh yes, the fascist scum in Brussels have set their Eye of Sauron on Ireland again.
Source: AOL Journals
By: Sylvia Booth Hubbard
Gardasil, the cervical cancer vaccine, which is being advised for all young women, may be causing pancreatitis, a painful, debilitating disease that can be fatal. Australian sources reported that three women developed pancreatitis shortly after receiving the vaccine.
Gardasil protects women from strains of the HPV (human papillomavirus) that cause 70 percent of all cervical cancer. But numerous cases of young women being stricken with various potentially deadly complications have arisen all over the world. Eighteen deaths have been reported as well as 8,000 adverse reactions which include paralysis and seizures. Australia alone reported over 1,000 suspected reactions to the vaccine, although most were not life-threatening and included headaches, dizziness and vomiting.
Acute pancreatitis is characterized by sudden, severe abdominal pain. Pancreatic enzymes burn and irritate the pancreas, then leak out into the abdominal cavity. Complications can include heart, respiratory or kidney failure, all of which can be fatal.
Dr. Amitabha Das, writing in the Medical Journal of Australia, said, “We suggest that pancreatitis be considered in cases of abdominal pain following HPV vaccination.
And more info on vaccines; Continue reading
Source: Daily Mail
Teenage boys should be vaccinated against cervical cancer alongside girls because they contribute to the spread of the disease, an infectious diseases expert said today.
Where have we seen this before…
Dr Paul Yeo said the Government vaccination programme should be widened because they risked leaving a ‘pool of infected individuals’ who could spread the virus to women later in life when the effect of the vaccination has potentially worn off.
The development of 70 per cent of all cervical cancers can be linked to infection by human papillomaviruses.
From September girls aged between 12 and 13 in the UK will be vaccinated against certain strains of HPV with a catch-up campaign for girls aged up to 18 starting in autumn 2009.
Remembers folks, vaccines don’t guarantee anything other than a fat paycheck for whomever sells them. The lifespan of the vaccine is about 5 years, and the average age of developing cervical cancer is 48. Not to forget most instances of HPV are easily dealt with naturally by a healthy immune system and there is no proof HPV causes the cancer anyway.
Dr Yeo, who specialises in virology and infectious diseases, said: ‘I would question why boys are not included in this vaccination programme as it is, after all, a sexually-transmitted disease which can lead to the cancer. Continue reading
It’s posted over at Free Britain.
Source: New York Times
Two vaccines against cervical cancer are being widely used without sufficient evidence about whether they are worth their high cost or even whether they will effectively stop women from getting the disease, two articles in this week’s New England Journal of Medicine conclude.
Both vaccines target the human papillomavirus, a common sexually transmitted virus that usually causes no symptoms and is cleared by the immune system, but which can in very rare cases become chronic and cause cervical cancer.
The two vaccines, Gardasil by Merck Sharp & Dohme and Cervarix by GlaxoSmithKline, target two strains of the virus that together cause an estimated 70 percent of cervical cancers. Gardasil also prevents infection with two other strains that cause some proportion of genital warts. Both vaccines have become quick best sellers since they were licensed two years ago in the United States and Europe, given to tens of millions of girls and women.
More info regarding HPV here.
Source: Natural News
(NaturalNews) Two new studies showing that vaccines increase the risk of diabetes have been published in the Open Pediatric Medicine Journal.
In a prior study, published in the journal Autoimmunity, Dr. J. Bartholomew Classen of Classen Immunotherapies and David Carey Classen of the University of Utah compared more than 100,000 children who had received between one and four doses of the hemophilus vaccine with more than 100,000 unvaccinated children. The Classens found that after seven years, children in the vaccination group had a 26 percent higher risk of developing diabetes than children in the non-vaccine group. This amounted to an extra 54 cases of diabetes per 100,000 children vaccinated.
The Classens noted that the vaccine itself is only projected to prevent seven deaths and seven to 26 cases of permanent disability per 100,000 children.
“Our results conclusively prove there is a causal relationship between immunization schedules and diabetes,” J. Bartholomew Classen said at the time.
Source: Global Research
There is alarming evidence accumulated by serious scientific sources that the US Government is about to or already has ‘weaponized’ Avian Flu. If the reports are accurate, this could unleash a new pandemic on the planet that could be more devastating than the 1918 Spanish Flu epidemic which killed an estimated 30 million people worldwide before it eventually died out. Pentagon and NIH experiments with remains in frozen state of the 1918 virus are the height of scientific folly. Is the United States about to unleash a new racially selective pandemic through the process of mandatory vaccination with an alleged vaccine “against” Avian Flu?
There is reason to believe that sections of the international pharmaceutical industry cartel are acting in concert with the US Government to develop a genetically modified H5N1 virus substance that could unleash a man-made pandemic, perhaps more deadly than the 1918 ‘Spanish Influenza’ pandemic claiming up to 30 million lives.1
Rima E. Laibow, MD, head of the Natural Solutions Foundation, a citizen watchdog group monitoring the pharmaceutical industry states, “Our best intelligence estimate is that pandemic Avian Flu has already been created through genetic engineering in the United States, fusing the deadly genome of the 1918 Pandemic, misnamed the ‘Spanish Flu’, with the DNA of the innocuous H5N1 virus in a growth medium of human kidney cells, according to the National Institutes of Health and the vaccine’s manufacturer. Some virologists believe that this would insure that the man-made mutant virus recognizes human cells and knows how to invade them.” 2 Continue reading
Yesterday I visited the British Museum. Amongst the many great exhibits was ‘Cradle to Grave by Pharmacopoeia’, in the Living and Dying section of the building. This is a static visual exhibit showing the average number of pills a human takes over their lifetime.
From the exhibit description;
Cradle to Grave explores our approach to health in Britain today. The piece incorporates a lifetime supply of prescribed drugs knitted into two lengths of fabric, illustrating the medical stories of one woman and one man.
Each length contains over 14,000 drugs, the estimated average prescribed to every person in Britain in their lifetime. This does not include pills we might buy over the counter, which would require about 40,000 pills each.
Some of the treatments are common to both: each starts at birth with an injection of vitamin K and immunizations, and both take antibiotics and painkillers at various times. Other treatments are more specific. The woman takes contraceptive pills, and hormone replacement therapy in middle age. The man has asthma and hay fever when young, but enjoys good health until his fifties. He finally stops smoking after a bad chest infection when he is seventy. He is treated for high blood pressure for the last ten years of his life and has a heart attack and dies of a stroke in his seventies. He takes as many pills in the last ten years of his life as in the first sixty-six.
Cradle to Grave also contains family photographs and other personal objects and documents. The captions, written by the owners, trace typical events in people’s lives. These show that maintaining a sense of well-being is more complex than just treating episodes of illness.
Pharmacopoeia are Susie Freeman, Dr Liz Lee and David Critchley.
Source: Scientific Blogging
New science indicating fluoride’s dangers to the brain and other organs will be presented by prominent fluoride research scientists during back-to-back conferences of the International Society for Fluoride Research (ISFR) and the Fluoride Action Network (FAN) in Toronto August 7-11, 2008.
Fluoride, added to water supplies to prevent tooth decay, is also in virtually all non-organic foods and beverages. Fluoride’s brain effects were never examined prior to water fluoridation.
Recently, because of health concerns, Health Canada recommended that fluoride levels be lowered in Canadian water supplies (0.7 mg/L) , children’s toothpaste and infant formula but claims that “the weight of evidence does not support a link between fluoride and intelligence quotient deficit.”
“It is hard to believe that any “weight of evidence” analysis could possibly dismiss fluoride’s neurological impacts. There have now been over 40 animal studies which show that fluoride can damage the brain, and no less than 18 studies which show that fluoride lowers IQ in children, and only 2 that don’t. I look forward to reading the full report when it is made available,” says Paul Connett, PhD, FAN Executive Director.
According to ISFR conference organizer, Dr. Hardy Limeback, “Our conference features experts who researched the dangers that fluoride poses to human health. Our keynote speaker, Dr. A.K. Susheela, (Executive Director, Fluorosis Research and Rural Development Foundation, India) probably knows more about fluoride’s toxic effects to the body than any other living scientist. It is important that officials who promote water fluoridation hear what she and others have to say,” says Limeback.
Susheela can also explain to Medical Doctors, often untrained in fluoride toxicology, how to diagnose, treat and reverse early symptoms of fluoride toxicity which mimic arthritis and irritable bowel syndrome. Continue reading
Codex Alimentarius was created in 1962 as a trade Commission by the UN to control the international trade of food. Its initial intentions may have been altruistic but it has been taken over by corporate interests, most notably the pharmaceutical, pesticide, biotechnology and chemical industries.
Codex Alimentarius will go into global implementation by December 31, 2009, unless We, the People, avert it.
We could have told you this years ago, but nevermind.
Source: Daily Mail
Every once in a while, a book not so much lands on your desk as lobs itself like a hand grenade, exploding preconceived wisdoms and shattering the bones of the status quo. Save The Males is such a book.
It is the fiercest and most fearless defence of men, fatherhood and ultimately the family I have read in many years.
American author Kathleen Parker’s courageous thesis is that initially, through extreme feminism, then via its craven implementation into society, women have demonised men and trivialised their contribution, especially to family life.
I say courageous because, in the eyes of many women and of the liberal establishment, suggesting men have had a rough deal is nothing short of heresy.
Parker should be burnt at the stake, they cry. But isn’t it ironic that only a woman could make such a plea for men?
She argues: ‘As long as men feel marginalised by the women whose favour and approval they seek, as long as they are alienated from their children and treated as criminals by family courts, as long as they are disrespected by a culture that no longer values masculinity tied to honour, as long as boys are bereft of strong fathers and our young men and women wage sexual war, then we risk cultural suicide.’
It’s enough to set a feminist’s hair on end. Parker argues that in trying to make the world fairer for women, an adjustment most agree was vital, we have made it unfair for men. In our attempt to honour women, we have dishonoured men.
By bending over backwards to make single mothers feel good about themselves, by diminishing the role of fathers, by elevating women as the superior parents, we have gone a considerable way to destroying one of the basic tenets of a successful society – family life.
Apart from the effects of this seismic social shift on society, it is also grossly unfair. Can you imagine a world where men demanded women be more like them – dress like them, act like them, even look like them. Because that is effectively what our post-feminist society has done, but with the genders switched.
The traditional male values, what Parker almost poetically calls ‘masculinity tied to honour’, are now seen as nothing more than a direct assault on women.
Unless men are like us, the thinking goes, they insult us and threaten our existence: hence the feminisation of men, or as we so disingenuously describe it, getting in touch with your feminine side.
Thus Hybrid Man was born. An acceptable male model now is more likely to be of the David Beckham variety, wearing more make-up than the missus, hairless, perfumed, varnished, emasculated by his bossy wife and perhaps fond of wearing her undies.
Good dads, loving husbands, supportive male role models, they’re few and far between even in the fictional world of TV. Continue reading
An additional 300,000 girls aged 17 and 18 are to be offered a controversial vaccine to protect them against the sexually-transmitted infection that can lead to cervical cancer, the Government has announced.
The girls, who will be offered the Cervarix vaccine from this September, would not have been eligible for it before the announcement.
Miss Primarolo said the £10 million one-off programme would save up to 400 lives.
How does she know? None of these vaccines have guarantees.
Dawn Primarolo, the health minister, said: “Our policy to vaccinate girls against cervical cancer is one of the biggest public health campaigns in recent history. It will mean that up to 400 girls’ lives will be saved each year.
“By choosing the right vaccine we have been able to make savings which means we can extend the programme to 17 and 18 year olds. This could save an additional 400 lives.”
They are not saving money. They are spending less of our money. But they are still giving our money to these corporations.
But medics and health campaigners have accused such commentators of wilfully ignoring that teenage sex happens. They have said denying girls an HPV vaccine is morally wrong.
Vaccinating against HPV in order to prevent cervical cancer? They obviously haven’t seen this report, from The Great Vaccine Hoax Exposed;
For the last several years, HPV vaccines have been marketed to the public and mandated in compulsory injections for young girls in several states based on the idea that they prevent cervical cancer. Now, NaturalNews has obtained documents from the FDA and other sources (see below) which reveal that the FDA has been well aware for several years that Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) has no direct link to cervical cancer.
NaturalNews has also learned that HPV vaccines have been proven to be flatly worthless in clearing the HPV virus from women who have already been exposed to HPV (which includes most sexually active women), calling into question the scientific justification of mandatory “vaccinate everyone” policies.
The Department of Health has refused to reveal the cost of the vaccine. Miss Power said GSK must have given a “considerable reduction” to win the deal. – End of source.
Unbelievable. It’s none of our business what they spend our money on apparently.
So, not only 12 and 13 year old’s, but by ‘saving money’ they will also try and inject 17 and 18 year old’s then the additional ‘top up’ for 14 and 18 year old’s in 2009. That’s three rounds of injections against a virus that most probably does not cause cervical cancer.
Glaxo’s balance sheet must be looking pretty healthy. They are still trying to get the vaccine approved in the U.S. as I write this, as Reuters reports;
Glaxo said it had responded to outstanding questions about Cervarix raised by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration but had decided to augment its application with results from a further Phase III study, called HPV-008.
Data from this trial are expected to be submitted to the U.S. regulator in the first half of 2009 and an FDA decision on the application is anticipated up to six months later.
Analysts, however, say the FDA is extremely cautious about approving new adjuvants because of the theoretical risk of side effects, increasing the regulatory hurdle for Glaxo’s vaccine.
Side effects? Nah, get out of here!
Side effects that occurred during clinical trials with Cervarix were as follows:
♦ Very common (side effects which may occur in more than 1 per 10 doses of vaccine):
• pain or discomfort at the injection site
• redness or swelling at the injection site
• aching muscles, muscle tenderness or weakness (not caused by exercise)
♦ Common (side effects which may occur in less than 1 per 10 but more than 1 per 100 doses of
• gastrointestinal symptoms including nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea and abdominal pain
• itching, red skin rash, hives (urticaria)
• joint pain
• fever (≥38°C)
♦ Uncommon (side effects which may occur in less than 1 per 100 but more than 1 per 1,000
doses of vaccine):
• upper respiratory tract infection (infection of the nose, throat or trachea)
• other injection site reactions such as hard lump, tingling or numbness.
A look at Cervarix ingredients, from the same document;
The active substances are:
Human Papillomavirus1 type 16 L1 protein2,3,4 20 micrograms
Human Papillomavirus1 type 18 L1 protein2,3,4 20 micrograms
adjuvanted by AS04 containing: 3-O-desacyl-4’- monophosphoryl lipid A (MPL)3 50 micrograms
adsorbed on aluminium hydroxide, hydrated (Al(OH)3) 0.5 milligrams Al3+ in total
L1 protein in the form of non-infectious virus-like particles (VLPs) produced by recombinant
DNA technology using a Baculovirus expression system which uses Hi-5 Rix4446 cells derived
from the insect Trichoplusia ni.
– The other ingredients are sodium chloride (NaCl), sodium dihydrogen phosphate dihydrate
(NaH2PO4.2 H2O) and water for injections.
Some samples from the Scientific Discussion PDF that stand out to me (as a layman, obviously);
No pharmacodynamic drug interaction studies were performed according to the Note for Guidance on Preclinical Pharmacological and Toxicological testing of vaccines (CPMP/465/95) and Guideline on Adjuvants in Vaccines for Human Use (EMEA/CHMP/VEG/134716/2004).
Studies to demonstrate absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion of the active ingredients in Cervarix have not been performed for any of the component viruses. This is in line with Note for guidance on preclinical pharmacological and toxicological testing of vaccines (CPMP/SWP/465/95).
Single-dose toxicity of the HPV-16/18 L1 VLP AS04 vaccine was assessed as part of the repeat-dose toxicity study in rabbits. The treatment was well tolerated and no treatment-related systemic effect was noticed on haematology, body-weight, clinical signs, mortality and clinical chemistry over a 14-day observation period.
According to the Note for Guidance on preclinical pharmacological and toxicological testing of vaccines (CPMP/SWP/465/95) and the Guideline on adjuvants in vaccines for human use
(EMEA/CHMP/VEG/134716/2004) genotoxicity studies are not required for this vaccine.
According to the Note for Guidance on preclinical pharmacological and toxicological testing of vaccines (CPMP/SWP/465/95) and the Guideline on adjuvants in vaccines for human use
(EMEA/CHMP/VEG/134716/2004) carcinogenicity studies are not required for this vaccine.
It’s 56 pages long, so I’m not going to go through it all here. I have provided the link above anyway if anyone is interested. Before I finish this however, I have one more query.
From the Discussion (to find these notes in the PDF, try copying and pasting one of the sentences into the PDF program search engine, that should take you right to it);
Based on their genomic differences within the oncogenes E6 and E7 and the capsid protein L1 over 100 genotypes are described to date. Thereof approximately 40 different genotypes lead to infections of the anogenital tract and about 16 are highly oncogenic with HPV types 16 and 18, being the most frequent found in cervical cancer. HPV-16 is detected in about 54% of cervical cancer cases, and the second type is HPV-18, detected in about 17% of cases.
The time from occurrence of HPV infection to cancer development usually exceeds 20 years.
However, persistent HPV infection is a necessary but not a sufficient factor for the development of cervical carcinoma. (what?) Other factors such as smoking, long-term use of oral contraceptives or high parity are suggested to play a role in the process that lead to cancer.
This next part is good;
The majority of genital HPV infections (>90%) however are transient sub-clinical infections that will be cleared or suppressed below the limits of detection by host cell defences within one to two years. In addition, any cervical lesion may spontaneously regress to normal without treatment with a probability of about 57% for CIN1, 43% for CIN2 and 32% for CIN3. The determinants leading to regression are not well understood.
Even according to this document, HPV isn’t looking much of a threat to me. Still they say this:
It is confirmed that persistent cervical infection by high risk HPV types is a precursor event to cervical cancer.
There was no evidence of protection from disease caused by the HPV types for which subjects were HPV DNA positive at study entry. However, individuals already infected with one of the vaccine-related HPV types prior to vaccination were protected from clinical disease caused by the remaining HPV type.
From the Product Information Report (again);
The duration of protection after vaccination is currently unknown. In clinical trials, sustained
protection has been observed in females aged 15 to 25 years for at least 5.5 years after the first dose. The need for booster dose(s) has not been investigated.
I hope you know, the average age of cervical cancer patients is 48. They want to give this vaccine to 12 year olds, although it lasts only 5.5 years? Why?
I feel stupid, I have a feeling I’m missing something here.
According to these documents, this vaccine ‘protects’ against two strains of HPV, of which there are over 100. They say that in patients that have been diagnosed with cervical cancer, HPV can be present (that is not evidence of causation.) Even then HPV 16 turns up 56% of the time, and HPV 18, 17%. It then says that other things can cause cervical cancer anyway. It doesn’t protect you if you already have HPV! Not that HPV causes the cancer. The body successfully deals with over 90% of HPV viruses anyway.
Somehow I don’t see the huge cost justified by these reports (of which I have barely skimmed.) These politicians are probably getting kick backs, it wouldn’t be the first time.
Seriously, they did. They were on holiday…
Nine British women were facing prostitution charges after being arrested at the weekend for taking part in an oral sex competition in the Greek holiday island of Zakynthos, police said on Monday.
Six British and six Greek men, including two bar owners, were also charged in the incident, which took place at Laganas beach in the south of the Ionian island, which lies off the west coast of mainland Greece, police said.
The women, who came to the popular resort on holiday, had been paid to take part in the competition, which was video recorded and was to be posted on the Internet, police said.
The men were charged with encouraging obscene behaviour.
Naturally they assumed it was the men’s idea, and What The F*ck, it was going to be put online and they still did it? Maybe they were the mothers of these girls, hoping for a bit of fame and all that. I wonder if they were all doing it, what the competition was? Which one could get a strangers’ sperm in their mouth the fastest?
The prostitution charge makes sense though. They were getting paid for sex. Now I wonder how many other women could be charged with that in this day and age…
Source: Daily Mail
A mum who killed her six-month-old baby by shaking him and throwing him to the ground causing devastating brain injuries has walked free from court.
Martina McHattie, 26, described as a perfect mum, lost her temper with horrific consequences after baby Reece wouldn’t stop crying because he was teething.
Are they trying to blame her actions on the baby?
A court heard the stress caused her to shake the infant and throw him against a hard object, fracturing his skull.
Reece died from his injuries four days later in October 2004.
The ‘perfect mother’ then lied to cover it up;
Police investigated the incident after doctors suspected Reece was not the victim of an accidental fall as McHattie had claimed. However there was insufficient evidence to prosecute.
The harrowing incident at her home in Wakefield, West Yorkshire, only came to the fore two years later when she admitted that she had caused Reece’s death because she was unable to cope.
But McHattie, who pleaded guilty to manslaughter, was handed just a 12-month suspended prison sentence after a judge was told she had tried to commit suicide and had self-harmed in the years since the death.
Right, so now this woman is a victim?
Defending, Michael Harrison QC said: ‘On a daily basis, this mum was taking superlative care of her baby.
‘It is therefore astonishing to find that in one catastrophic moment she gave way to the stresses that had built up in the days and hours before.
‘In the last two weeks he was teething and she was getting flustered because she couldn’t soothe him.
‘What went on in her mind was a feeling of inadequacy and so in that moment she brought everything crashing down around her and ended her baby’s life.
The baby is dead. She not only killed him but lied afterwards, but because she was feeling inadequate and took a few pills she gets a suspended sentence.
Just another case of the Pussy Pass. Throw it on the pile!
Source: Daily Mail
One third of terminations are carried out on women who have had at least one before – and some have had eight or more.
Some girls are on their fourth abortion before they reach 18, figures from the Department of Health show.
Girl power. Feminists must be proud.
The statistics have emerged as MPs consider relaxing the abortion laws to make the procedure easier to obtain.
Pro-life MPs and campaigners said it was clear that abortion is already available on demand.
In 2007, 64,230 abortions were carried out on women who had at least one before – a 12 per cent rise in four years.
Of these, 49,484 were having their second termination, 11,136 were on their third and 2,605 having number four.
Fifty-two notched up abortion number seven last year, and 29 were on at least number eight.
The number of under-18s undergoing repeat abortions is also on the rise, increasing from 1,446 in 2006 to 1,465 last year – or almost 30 a week.
Thirteen girls under 18 were among the group of women who were having at least their fourth abortion.
Repeat abortions were most common among women aged 18-24, suggesting the procedure is seen as an easy way out by those who become pregnant at university or while starting their careers.
Hmm, how about Girls + Alcohol + Feminism = Record Number of Abortions
Nadine Dorries, the Tory MP who earlier this year spearheaded a campaign to cut the abortion time limit, said: ‘The figures show very clearly that for some, easy access to abortion has fostered a careless attitude to contraception and has itself become a form of contraception when required.’
Citing research which showed having an abortion raises the risk of mental health problems later in life, she said: ‘Young women have the right to know the consequences of abortion, particularly repeat abortions.’
Abortions are carried out in two ways. Early pregnancies can be ended by taking two miscarriage-triggering drugs over a 48-hour period.
Women also have the choice of a ‘surgical’ abortion, in which the unborn baby is suctioned or scraped out of the womb under anaesthetic.
Both techniques can also be used late in pregnancy – but will be preceded with a lethal injection into the baby’s heart.
But Dr Kate Worsley, of Marie Stopes International, which carries out around a third of UK abortions, said it was ‘ ludicrous’ to suggest women viewed abortion as a form of contraception.
‘Whether or not to have an abortion can be one of the most difficult decisions a woman has to make,’ she said. ‘No woman undergoes such a serious procedure lightly.’
Well of course she is going to say that, her company gets paid performing abortions. Ripping out your babies and throwing them in the rubbish bin puts food on their table. I wonder if repeaters get a discount from the taxpayer (who pays, as always.)
The more I have researched abortions, ‘family planning clinics’ and the like, the more I have turned against them. We all know the rules. If you don’t want children, use protection or better yet, don’t have sex. Simple really. But as is usually the case when you remove the consequences of a particular behaviour, incidences of that behaviour will increase if it appeals to a persons instincts. The promotion of abortions is done purely for reducing the worlds population, not because of ‘overpopulation’, a myth I have written about here, but because less people are easier to enslave.
In fact, all of those extra babies would go a long way to balancing our our birth rate, which is currently way below replacement rates, something that always happens with societies that adopt feminism. This conveniently encourages the Government to encourage immigration from other countries, including ones with diametrically opposed cultures and religions. These in turn create ghettos in the host nation, creating social disharmony. But bad news for the People usually means good news for the Police State.